Aug 01 2007

Liberal Media Attacks Military Families

Published by at 8:30 am under All General Discussions

This is one of the most disgusting hit-pieces on the families of our brave military risking their lives overseas for our general welfare. The liberal media, which can only vaguely grasp what it means to serve (and I did not serve and therefore cannot claim any experience either – but I acknowledge this personal limitation), has decided to do a piece that connects serving in the military and serving your country with child abuse:

U.S. kids turn out to be Iraq war’s collateral damage
STUDY | Mom more likely to hurt them when husband at war

Children in some Army families are vulnerable to abuse and neglect by their mothers when their fathers are away at war in Iraq and Afghanistan, a large Pentagon-funded study finds.
Mothers were three times more likely to have a substantiated report of child mistreatment when their soldier husbands were deployed than when the fathers were home, according to the research.

First a few lessons in statistics. The multiplier ‘three times’ sounds big, but one needs to know what number is being multiplied. 3 times 1 is 3. So if it the instances of ‘abuse’ rise from 1% to 3% then, yes that is three times more, but still a small fraction (and open to debate if that is not simply sampling error). When I see multipliers like this I know from experience we are talking tiny initial numbers. Things do not change that dramatically when you even talk 20% as the starting number. You will not see 20% abuse initially and then 60% afterwards. That is a clear mathematical clue the numbers in both cases are small.

Then we have to understand the definition used for ‘abuse’:

”She leaves the young child alone in the apartment, doesn’t get the child off to school in the morning, doesn’t keep the house in a livable condition,” said lead author Deborah Gibbs.

Yeah, right. Look, serving overseas is hard on the families. But the military family network does amazing things to help alleviate the pressures. But the fear of losing your loved one can make kids go crazy and test your patience. This is a hit piece meant to disparage one group of Americans who are doing more than any other group in America to serve this country. They are putting life and limb on the line. And they are burying their friends and neighbors at the same time.

The one data point missing, which is the most important, is how do the rates for military familiies compare to the general population in America. Given the families I know, their dedication to service, their discipline and their support network, I would wager the peak abuse levels don’t even come close to the abuse levels in the general population. But that fact is not reported in this piece of garbage parading as ‘news’. To the media the military is now filled with child abusers (not baby killers). Pathetic.

Update: Yep, I was right. The numbers went from 5 in 1000 to 10 in 1000 (which is a doubling not a tripling) – according to USA Today” (and yes, the media echo chamber is running wild with math they cannot comprehend). The 30% number was not in total increase, as reported in the other story. It was “Among military personnel with at least one dependent, the rate of child maltreatment in military families increased by approximately 30% for each 1% increase in the percentage of active-duty personnel departing to or returning from operation-related deployment,”. Whatever, the total rate only doubled as is still only 1% of the population. Math is the SurrenderMedia’s bane.

One cautionary note to take from these Colorado state abuse statistics is the vast majority of ‘abuse’ incidents are not considered abuse:

In 2005, apporoximately 30,000 children were reported abused or neglected and referred for investigation in Colorado. Out of that number, nearly 9,000 cases were substantiated or indicated as abused.

If someone finds a national number (so many out of 1,000) I would like to see if it compares to those in the study which is now feeding this media frenzy. I for one hope the assistance is provided and works. I cannot abide child abuse. But I also cannot abide media proganda against the families of our military.

15 responses so far

15 Responses to “Liberal Media Attacks Military Families”

  1. Soothsayer says:

    AJ – could you at least READ your own stories before posting them. You’re complaining about media propaganda . . . and your own post states conclusively:

    Children in some Army families are vulnerable to abuse and neglect by their mothers when their fathers are away at war in Iraq and Afghanistan, a large Pentagon-funded study finds.

    The last time I looked, the Pentagon is under the control and command of the Commander-in-Chief George Walker Bush. So, it if PROPAGANDA you’re talking about — the propaganda is coming from the Administration you support, and funded by the Administration you support.

    You want to blame the media for reporting what the Pentagon tells them?????? If the Pentagon does not want the story reported, perhaps they should keep it to themselves. Note the quotes:

    Army officials said the study confirms what they’ve seen at large military bases for nearly two years, overwhelmed and depressed mothers neglecting their children.

    ”This is another recognition of the stress that families are experiencing with multiple deployments, and that shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone,” said Rene Robichaux of the U.S. Army Medical Command.

    And this is the MEDIA’s fault???

  2. Soothsayer says:

    Note: The story appeared in the Chicago Snn-Times – a Murdoch/Fox News owned newspaper . . . and hardly the liberal media.

  3. Soothsayer says:

    Note: The story appeared in the Chicago Sun-Times – a Murdoch/Fox News owned newspaper . . . and hardly the liberal media.

  4. crosspatch says:

    Sooth, just because Foc is owned by Newscorp doesn’t mean A: every property owned by Newscorp shares Fox’s position on things or B: that Murdoch even shares Fox’s position.

    Rupert Murdoch is a Hillary Clinton supporter. I wouldn’t consider the Times of London to be a bastion of conservative thought either. Murdoch is a BUSINESS man, Fox is THE most popular news channel on the Internet, more popular than CNN and MSNBC combined. If a conservative viewpoint sells and makes money, that’s what he will do.

    I would bet that Murdoch owns both liberal AND conservative papers.

    Again, Sooth, people have to come in here and give you an education. Why don’t you just go to school?

  5. crosspatch says:

    I am going to guess that the trends in this study have been true ever since the American Revolution.

    I am not sure what it proves I will bet the same was true among families where a parent shipped out for Gettysburg or France or Guadalcanal or Saigon or Kuwait or Baghdad.

    I dont believe we are seeing anything unique to the Iraq war.

  6. crosspatch says:

    “most popular news channel on the Internet”

    Meant most popular news channel in America on television, not the Internet. Fox has, last time I looked, the top 4 highest rated shows on TV cable news. The highest rated show on CNN (Larry King) came in lower than four Fox shows and by a wide margin.

  7. AJStrata says:


    Misrepresenting the study by not putting it into context is the point of my post. Not there was not a study.

  8. Soothsayer says:


    My point if merely . . . both the study AND the quotes . .. were from DoD folks, so its hard for me to justify blaming the messenger . . . for merely reporting what they’re told by offical spokerspersons.

  9. Soothsayer says:


    My point is simply that both the study and the quotes were direct from DOD . . . and all the media did was report what they were told.

    How does that make it their fault?

  10. Terrye says:

    Well, I could also say that women who get divorces are more likely to abuse their children than women who do not, I don’t doubt it is true.

    But the whole issue is ridiculous anyway, there could be a lot of other variables as well. Such as do military families have more children in them than the families of non military people? Are the mothers in military families more likely to be stay at home mothers?

    It is just something to bitch about, to use to make the military look bad.

  11. smh10 says:

    It is interesting that this person:

    Col. Rene Robichaux, the former chief of the Department of Social Work at Brook Army Medical Center in San Antonio, Tex., who retired Jan. 1.

    was used as a source for this article don’t you think? Could the author not get the same quotes from an active duty member?

    The anonymous sourcing of these pieces, ie “Army officials”, should be enough to tell anyone the writer has put their own spin on the facts.

  12. Terrye says:

    I have heard the same kind of stories about cops and their families.

  13. smh10 says:

    It appears the study utilized for the piece published today is this one:

    If this is the vase it needs to be read carefully to see how this sampling was achieved.

    Also, this was pentagon funded but the report was issued by these folks at the University of North Carolina. This was dated 13 May so why the repeat today…did it not garner enough publicity back then?

  14. smh10 says:



  15. Soothsayer says:

    It is just something to bitch about, to use to make the military look bad.

    Terry — the study was done BY the military. So you’re saying that the military is now trying to make the military look bad??? Interesting strategy.

    Dude, that’s twisted logic even by your standards.