Borg Refinery
Banned
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2024
- Messages
- 1,351
- Reaction score
- 713
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
Parents or caretakers may be charged with a form of criminal or civil penalty called "failure to protect" when they do not prevent another person from abusing the children in their care. Although couched in gender-neutral terms, defendants charged with failure to protect are almost exclusively female. In this Note, JeanneFugate suggests that the unequal numbers of women facing such charges can beexplained by the higher expectations that women face in the realm of parenting andchild care.
The disproportionate number also reflect the number of deadbeat dads in our culture. Single parenting by Mom or Dad?
Many of the laws here in the USA are so disgusting and so messed up ...
Obviously women who enable abuse should be punished, but those will be beaten or killed if they resist, or can't flee shouldn't be penalised for this
Gawd, how does one person get to be so damned bitter?Leftists shit on families, devalue human life, destroyed relationship roles, and now piss themselves because the results impact women at a greater rate than men...
shocking.
I have him on ignore mate, all he does is try to destroy threads.Gawd, how does one person get to be so damned bitter?
Angriest person on the internet.
A @VanceMack post. How excellent.Leftists shit on families, devalue human life, destroyed relationship roles, and now piss themselves because the results impact women at a greater rate than men...
shocking.
Note both parents can be charged with it. This is often used for parents who do things like not feed their kids or wander off to buy drugs and something happens to the child.
Many of the laws here in the USA are so disgusting and so messed up ...
Obviously women who enable abuse should be punished, but those will be beaten or killed if they resist, or can't flee shouldn't be penalised for this
This is truly funny. I just had a read of your link. It is almost a copy of the nz anti smacking law.
Many of the laws here in the USA are so disgusting and so messed up ...
Obviously women who enable abuse should be punished, but those will be beaten or killed if they resist, or can't flee shouldn't be penalised for this
... is an amendment to New Zealand's Crimes Act 1961 which removed the legal defence of "reasonable force" for parents prosecuted for assault on their children.....The bill was colloquially referred to by several of its opponents and newspapers as the "anti-smacking bill".[1] ....Prior to the amendment of section 59 of the Crimes Act 1961, there were cases of parents who had disciplined their children using a riding crop in one case, and a rubber hose in another, who were not convicted because of the legal justification of "reasonable force".[6] When the law was changed in 2007, some proponents of the change said it would stop cases of abuse from slipping through the gaps and reduce the infant death rate.[7]
Not sure I'm a fan of this, but it's a long document so I didn't read the whole thing. Negligent endangerment is one thing, but what are abused moms supposed to do to "protect" their kids, put the guy in an arm bar?
Many of the laws here in the USA are so disgusting and so messed up ...
Obviously women who enable abuse should be punished, but those will be beaten or killed if they resist, or can't flee shouldn't be penalised for this
Good Comment!!! MAGA!!! Those shitty leftists who shit on families, and caused everything bad!! And they're always pissing on themselves!! SHITTY LEFTISTS!! MAGA!!! GET OFF MY LAWN!!Leftists shit on families, devalue human life, destroyed relationship roles, and now piss themselves because the results impact women at a greater rate than men...
shocking.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?