Deadly Compassion Part IV

NAMBLA is an extremely tame organization compared to others. NAMBLA would say, for example, that they are opposed to forcible sexual contact with children. Other organizations are not. 
– Andrew Vachss, author, child advocate

Statistics

Although child abuse has always existed the ways which we manage the victims of these crimes has obviously changed with the times. With such a sensitive, complex and poorly understood subject, statistics will always remain controversial in that they are able to shape our perceptions so effectively for whatever agenda is being proposed.

The statistics on sex crime and sexual abuse are some of the most hotly contested of all media reports. Child abuse has been placed in the spotlight yet without the requisite caution and objectivity, courtesy of politicians and the mainstream media. None of the statistics quoted in this series of articles have a unanimous consensus. All are disputed and fought over according to which particular camp the group or individual belongs to. Different definitions and purposes will dictate the outcome of even the most objective data. Sexual abuse is, by nature, highly charged with emotion and instincts, thus a clear statistical appraisal of this phenomena will always be to some degree flawed. Yet how can we know by how much a general heightened awareness has caused the seeming rise in child abuse? Can we differentiate between a rise in the number of cases and an increase in the actual incidences of abuse? How is it possible to formulate definitions of abuse when controversy over these definitions has not been resolved? Author and Child activist Andrew Vachss explains:

I don’t think child abuse has changed. I do think that reporting has changed. When people pick up a newspaper today, they are likely to read about some case of child abuse. I don’t think fifty years ago that was true. In fact, I know it was not. So, if you look at child abuse statistics, which didn’t exist, say, in 1955, and then you looked at them today, you’d say, ‘Oh my God, child abuse has increased into this huge epidemic.’ My suggestion is that there’s no proof that child abuse, in and of itself, has increased. There is proof that case-finding techniques have increased, and reporting has increased. ¹

The very nature of quantitative and qualitative statistical analysis and data gathering is prone to serious bias and belief systems of the researchers and is open to political manipulations. As we will discover, abuse serves an important purpose in this regard. In such a highly contentious field of enquiry the “butterfly effect” applied to data changes that are erroneous and sourced from ideology, beliefs and supposition can result in big differences in the final studies on abuse and neglect. 
 

When the media is told to get behind whatever propagated statistic is deemed useful to those in power then it is almost assured that this truth, or this lie will become a household “norm.” For example, which would you trust? Studies that collect official government statistics or studies that offers the opportunity for anonymous, independent collection and retrospective data gathering from professionals on the ground? The latter would be my preference. However, if the media has some shocking statistics and does not provide anyway to evaluate their authenticity or access to relevant information which could show how these statistics were obtained, then it is very easy to support one’s headline and the associated belief, whatever that may be. 

 

Statistics are uniformly used to substantiate loud proclamations when an argument may be weak. As statistics have the stamp of officialdom and authority, people automatically take numbers as facts. In the world of abuse this can and does lead to severe problems for all, but an easy and useful tool for the Establishment. When well meaning social activism gets the wind in its sails, they can often be a pawn in the chess game of covert forces at work. Innumeracy and lack of critical thinking ensures the game is played out resulting in a “social comedy” that can nevertheless have dire consequences as one writer describes:

“‘Activists want to draw attention to a problem. . . The press asks for statistics. . . Knowing that big numbers indicate a big problems and knowing that it will be hard to get action unless people can be convinced a big problem exists (and sincerely believing that there is a big problem), the activists produce a big estimate, and the press, having no good way to check the number, simply publicizes it. The general public – most of us suffering from at least a mild case of innumeracy – tends to accept the figure without question.’” ²

The article goes on to mention three basic questions to keep in mind when presented with statistics: Who created the statistic? Why was the statistic created and how? It becomes apparent then the identities, history and data gathering of the experts are key component in the support or suspicion of statistics. The National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect (NCCAN) remains one of the best and by all accounts the most accurate resources available.

An overriding thought to be aware of is the persistent logic that most reports will not come to the attention of the authorities (assuming these authorities are not implicated in abuse themselves) and we can thus say that sexual abuse may be more common than we think. “Substantiated cases” in the US and “registered children” in the UK are an example of how many cases never reach social services let alone the courts. Children and young adults cannot and will not report their abuser to authorities due to the nature of the crime that is deeply entrenched in social taboos. This is particularly the case with incest (otherwise known as intra-familial abuse). 
 

Overall, statistics are extremely easy to manipulate if they serve a long term agenda. For example, violent crime took a large jump in early 2006 which is hardly surprising coming as it does on the back of a number of new draconian laws related to “protecting freedoms.” In the true style we have come to expect from American institutions: “The FBI report did not give any explanation why the violent crime numbers and murders went up last year, but Justice Department officials said during a news briefing that the government's policies were not to blame.” ³ Of course, that seems fair. “We have no idea but it isn’t our policies that are reshaping US society.” In reality, we may be witnessing a dramatic increase and / or reporting of child sexual abuse rather than the much vaunted decrease by US authorities.

There is evidence that FBI and Department of Justice can be rather selective with their statistics if they can get away with it. Some of the ways in which these data are distorted include:

• Reducing child sex abuse rates by deleting official data on sex abuse of children under 12;
• Eliminating sodomy of boys by reclassifying boys in an ageless —male rape category;
• Lowering child abuse predator recidivism by aggregating child molesters into a generalized category of —violent assault;
• Decreasing abuse data for unmarried fathers, step fathers and —live-in boyfriends by aggregating these men with biological, married fathers into —parents and other caretakers“ for incest offenders;
• Excising data on prostituted and other child sex abuse crimes from DOJ‘s —“Severity of Crime” scales that measure public views of crime severity - implying that child sexual abuse is benign.
• Wholesale failure to tabulate data on child sex abuse within the child protective services system. ⁴

The FBI and Intelligence agencies generally have long history of denying child abuse and any other new social deviancy that begins to burst at the seams of society. The Klu Klux Klan, and organised crime were all initially denied until such denials became embarrassing for their obvious untruths. The existence of organised satanic cults is now also officially denied. Yet when official culture enforces denials which fly in the face of copious amounts of evidence to the contrary it usually means that our governments and agencies stand to benefit. Their benefits will always translate to a substantial loss for the ordinary man, woman and child.

Notes 

1 op c.f. Vachss.

2 pp. 19-21., Damned Lies and Statistics: Untangling Numbers from the Media, Politicians, and Activists. By Joel Best, 2001, University of California Press; ISBN: 0520219783.

3 ‘FBI reports biggest violent crime jump in 15 years’ By James Vicini, Reuters, Jun 12, 2006.

4 ‘How the FBI and DOJ Minimize Child Sexual Abuse Reporting’ by Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D. The Institute for Media Education July 2002 An Examination of Relevant Child Abuse Data Suggesting That Reported Decreased Violence to Adults May be a Function of Unreported Increased Violence to Children The Institute for Media Education Interim Report.