Natural?

The beating to death of a football player Adrian Peterson’s 2 year old son has received national — and international — attention because of the father’s fame, but similar cases are in the news all the time, and receive little attention.

A lot of infants are killed by mother’s boyfriends. For whatever horrible reason, what happened to Adrian Peterson’s baby at the hands of his mother’s boyfriend happens all the time. Often, the mothers are in on it.

Civilized people recoil and might exclaim that such a thing is unnatural. What sort of man would kill an infant, and what sort of mother would leave her infant with a man who had a history of child abuse and domestic violence? Not normal people, but it happens more often than you might think.

 The rate of infant homicide reached a 30-year high in 2000.

The rate more than doubled from 4.3 homicides per 100,000 children under age one in 1970 to 9.1 per 100,000 children under age one in 2000. This trend occurred during a period in which there was an overall decrease in infant mortality from all sources.

Research studies of infant death data drawn from multiple agency records (e.g., police or social service records) indicate that the actual rate of infant deaths attributable to substantial abuse or neglect of infants and children up to four years of age is more than twice as high as the official rates reported in death certificate data.

Homicide is the leading cause of injury deaths among infants (under one year of age) in the United States.

Overall, it is the 15th leading cause of infant mortality from all causes. Homicide risk is greater in the first year of life than in any other year of childhood before age 17. Perpetrators are typically the mother, father or stepfather.

Infants are most likely to be killed by their mother during the first week of life but are more likely to be killed by a male (usually their father or stepfather) thereafter.

It’s sometimes hard to tell  whether or not the male is a father, stepfather or boyfriend of the mother, and the articles often don’t use the phrase “biological father” as this one did.  So I can’t determine whether it is more likely that more babies are killed by their biological fathers than by genetic strangers who happen to be sleeping with — and probably influence — their mothers.

Fortunately, most people aren’t like lions.

 


Posted

in

by

Tags:

Comments

5 responses to “Natural?”

  1. Edward Lunny Avatar
    Edward Lunny

    I have to wonder, is this a byproduct of the dehumanization of babies, children by prevalent abortion and abortion access ? Granted, there will always be those folks whom are hateful, evil, and unexplainable. But, when you consider that the life of a child can be legally snuffed out for no reason other than, fill in the blank, how much concern, care, or emotional value can a child have to anyone who would consider doing that ? Ethically, morally, the timing of an abortion and this horrific crime are no different. I would not be surprised to find that these people, and those who have perpetrated the same crime, see no difference between this murder and an abortion. This child, these children, are an inconvenience and as such must be removed, discarded, ignored, in the minds of these folks and those of a similar bent.

  2. Veeshir Avatar

    I wonder if it’s a result of the rise of unwed mothers.

    In other words, the rise of babies competing with both their mother and mother’s new friend for attention.

    The mother wants a life, which a baby makes difficult.

    The “uncle” wants more of the mother’s attention.

    They both resent the baby, and if there’s one thing humans are good at it’s rationalizing doing something about things that we resent.

  3. Gringo Avatar
    Gringo

    Veshir
    I wonder if it’s a result of the rise of unwed mothers.

    Indirectly, yes. The rise in unwed mothers means that there is higher incidence of “stepfathers” associated with young children.

    From what I have read, “stepfathers” are much more likely to kill or abuse children than actual fathers.My memory was not faulty:Step-fathers who Kill

    In 1988, US data showed that children aged up to two are at about 100 times greater risk of being killed by their stepfather than their biological father.Psychologists call this the Cinderella effect. The research went on to look at British data, concluding that it indicated “considerable excess risk at the hands of stepfathers”.

    With the rates of remarriage, divorce and cohabitation steadily increasing, giving rise to more stepfamilies, this is a disturbing thought. According to the Office of National Statistics, in 2006 84% of stepfamilies consisted of a stepfather and biological mother living with children from her previous relationship.

    Research suggests that whereas genetic fathers often kill their children “more in sorrow than in anger”, out of perceived necessity and/or as part of a suicide, homicides committed by stepfathers tend to be more rage driven, impulsive acts motivated by hostility towards the child and characterised by violently beating or shaking them.

    Despite this evidence, some researchers believe that minimal attention has been given to stepfathers – or mothers’ boyfriends – as the perpetrators of these crimes and the reasons behind them.

    David Finkelhor, director of the Crimes Against Children Research Center in the US, says: “Sociobiologists point out that these are men who have no genetic stake in this child and see them as competition for attention and time, and their own offspring. Among other primates it’s not unknown for a new alpha male to kill the children of the dominant male when he comes into a group.”

    But Finkelhor believes the reasons are simpler than that. “That has some reality to it, but I think it operates through more familiar psychological mechanisms; that these aren’t men who feel a natural affinity or protectiveness about the children of the women they are involved with. These are not men who are nurturing.”

    More at the link. Regarding wanting more of the mother’s attention, some researchers agree with that but others see it as the stepfather lacking a nurturing instinct towards infants who are not their own.

  4. Veeshir Avatar

    but others see it as the stepfather lacking a nurturing instinct towards infants who are not their own.

    I won’t argue with that, but I know plenty of guys who have a “nurturing” attitude toward kids not their own (me, for instance).

    As they say, correlation is not causation.

    So you have guys who wouldn’t feel “nurturing” towards any kids, whether their own or someone else’.

  5. Gringo Avatar
    Gringo

    I won’t argue with that, but I know plenty of guys who have a “nurturing” attitude toward kids not their own (me, for instance).

    No disagreement. We are seeking an explanation for the very small minority of stepfathers who kill their stepchildren. Most stepfathers treat their stepchildren well. The homicide rate for children under age one is 9.1 per hundred thousand. Which means that 99,991 out of 100,000 children under the age of one are NOT killed. Whatever the percentage of such children who have stepfathers, the math says that a very small minority of stepfathers kill their stepchildren.