2 Matching Annotations
  1. Jul 2018
    1. On 2015 Jan 21, John Cannell commented:

      How was the abuse "documented"? By a Child Abuse Committee? By Child Protective Services (CPS)? By the courts? How were the caregivers judged to be guilty? Without witnessed abuse or free and un-coerced confessions by caregivers, you have no way of knowing how many innocent caregivers were included in the "guilty" group.

      Therefore, selection bias makes studies similar to Darling et al's practically useless. What percent of studies of “guilty” cases involve CPS telling innocent parents if they admit to the abuse - and take parenting classes - they can immediately get their infant back and avoid further costly litigation? What percentage of “guilty” cases involves CPS allowing innocent parents to plead "guilty" to the lesser charge of neglect to get their infant returned and avoid further litigation?

      In what percentage of “guilty” cases does the district attorney or CPS give a mother the “Sophie’s Choice” of not being prosecuted and getting her infant back if she will testify against her innocent husband? What percent of “guilty” cases involve an innocent parent accepting a plea bargain after the defense attorney concludes a trial will result in conviction?

      For these reasons studies on infantile child abuse such as Darling et al have selection bias and, in my opinion, include an unknown number of innocent caregivers in the "guilty" group, making the studies scientifically unreliable.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.

  2. Feb 2018
    1. On 2015 Jan 21, John Cannell commented:

      How was the abuse "documented"? By a Child Abuse Committee? By Child Protective Services (CPS)? By the courts? How were the caregivers judged to be guilty? Without witnessed abuse or free and un-coerced confessions by caregivers, you have no way of knowing how many innocent caregivers were included in the "guilty" group.

      Therefore, selection bias makes studies similar to Darling et al's practically useless. What percent of studies of “guilty” cases involve CPS telling innocent parents if they admit to the abuse - and take parenting classes - they can immediately get their infant back and avoid further costly litigation? What percentage of “guilty” cases involves CPS allowing innocent parents to plead "guilty" to the lesser charge of neglect to get their infant returned and avoid further litigation?

      In what percentage of “guilty” cases does the district attorney or CPS give a mother the “Sophie’s Choice” of not being prosecuted and getting her infant back if she will testify against her innocent husband? What percent of “guilty” cases involve an innocent parent accepting a plea bargain after the defense attorney concludes a trial will result in conviction?

      For these reasons studies on infantile child abuse such as Darling et al have selection bias and, in my opinion, include an unknown number of innocent caregivers in the "guilty" group, making the studies scientifically unreliable.


      This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.