80 percent of single prents are mothers. 26.4% of children on the US are raised by single parent households with about 22% of children in the US raised by a single mother and 5% raised by a single father. https://realdiapers.org/single-parent/

I found this using recent census data https://realdiapers.org/single-parent/

Yes - I agree with most of what you said here. I have done the research myself and asked the question to provoke thought in people who repeat the “courts” statement.

Wouldn’t a more accurate statement be that “US society favors the mother”?

There is heavy implication in saying “US courts heavily favor the mother” … Yet the majority of custody decisions are decided without court rulings? But one could argue that fathers don’t try because they’ve heard that courts heavily favors mothers. Perhaps this is indicative of how the average person does not understand how the legal process works.

Maybe the statement should be “the courts favor the primary caretaker”? This is also a misleading oversimplification as most courts favor both parents being involved in a child’s life.

Some people would say that it’s just words - but all word choices have implications and most people involved in society, whether they admit it or not, pick up on those implications.

For example: the troll below saying that men are second class citizens. Or the OP coming to the conclusion that mothers are more abusive based off of raw data without interpretation. The wording of their data certainly implies this. I argue that the only useful conclusions from this data set is that : child abuse sadly still exists & child abuse is commonly committed by those with opportunity. Neither of these conclusions are ground-breaking.

I’ve enjoyed your objective responses. Thank you for the discussion.

P.S. - I would love to see a Water Bear Disco. Please link video.

In this case, the data is not that beautiful

Sources: Brand Finance

Generated using Rose AI

"Brand Finance's Royalty Relief Methodology is based on the notion that a brand-holding company owns the brand and licenses it to an operating company. The notional price paid by the operating company to the brand company is expressed as a royalty rate. The NPV (net present value) of all forecast royalties represents the value of the brand to the business. This method is based on commercial practice in the real world. It involves esti-mating likely future sales, applying an appropriate royalty rate to them and then discounting estimated future, post-tax royalties, to arrive at a NPV. The steps in the Royalty Relief brand valuation process are as follows:
− obtain brand specific financial and revenue data,
− model the market to identify market demand and the position of individual brands in the context of market competitors,
− establish the notional royalty rate for each brand"

>"Was" being the operative word.

...and it was replaced with "whatever the judge thinks is best". For judges that were either trained under "tender years" or grew up in the environment created by it. The social inertia of tender years extends beyond it being formally ended.

But then, there's notable opposition to the very idea of not favoring mother's - Kentucky passed a law a couple of years ago requiring judges to start from a position that equal custody is best unless there's a good reason otherwise. This was heavily fought, significantly by feminist groups who described supporters as the "abusers lobby", as in their mind the only reason a man would want significant custody of his children is to use them as a means to continue abusing their mother. The law passing was considered a big win by men's rights supporters specifically because it reduced bias in family courts.

One in every crowd

I can’t find the immigrants either!

👍So right! Well said!💪💞

This a very important point about raw counts versus rates. This data is not in a form that lends itself to drawing useful insights.

It’s also worth noting that this data contains counts of neglect, which can often come from poor economic status. That compounds with your point about the employment differential, to further wipe away the idea that this data implies mothers are more physically abusive to children.

Request: Can it be required to include your data source? Not a link to the data or anything (tho if that's available, awesome!) but just some general information in case anyone wants to share the image. For example, I teach and would love to include some of this info in my lectures, but I always try to cite where I got the info from. I can't do that if I don't know, so I can't use the info since I can't verify it's validity.

Did you really look at the data that close? This data includes much more than physical abuse. It also includes neglect driven by poverty. Mothers are more likely to be left with children and the poor are more likely to be visited by child protective services for harmful neglect. So of course mothers will be at the top of this list, but not because they are more violent toward children. This data does not support that conclusion.

From the Supplementary Notes “Each state has its own definition of child abuse and neglect based on standards set by federal law. Child abuse is defined as any recent act or failure to act on the part of a parent or caretaker which results in death, serious physical or emotional harm, sexual abuse or exploitation; or an act or failure to act which presents an imminent risk or serious harm.”

My experience: Foster parent to one teen for less than a year. Tried to be prepared by taking lots of trauma-based parenting classes and reading, because studying is what I am familiar with. It helped, but I doubt anyone is ever really ready.

My perspective: Children’s behavior is complicated. I’d caution against assuming you can look at their behavior and guess what the cause is. Even when you’re in the middle of it things are difficult to understand. Also, the behavior of deeply traumatized children is often misunderstood. There are no easy answers.

Right. Thank you.

[deleted]

[removed]

People just don't want accept numbers. They are so used that man are evil and violent that they create excuses to excuse women.

The only way this graphic could be good (for both sides) is to have , like in each one women as a single mother and women as family. The same with men. Only way to be accurate.

I really like this graph. That being said, the population has grown significantly over the span of this report. Let’s say that trend continues, then the number of deaths will grow over time as well (more people exist to die). What I’d like to see is the graph adjusted for population, like financial reports are adjusted for inflation. Then we can see death rates as a percentage of population over time. Please forgive me if this was already incorporated into it. Great graphic

A lot of this is raw count data is simply correlation data (not true incident rates) closely related to time spent with children. Comparing raw counts can be very misleading, and make people think that "moms are 2X more likely to abuse children", which is not true...

Moms have much higher raw numbers than dads, not necessarily because they are more abusive, but because there are 5X more kids living with single moms than single dads by looking at divorce child custody rates, plus single parent rates, and overall living arrangement percentages.

According to a 2022 Living Arrangements of Children report released by the U.S. Census Bureau, "the majority (70.1%) of the nation's children under age 18 lived with two parents, 21.4% lived with their mother, 4.4% with their father, and 4.0% did not live with a parent". ( https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2022/living-arrangements-of-chldren.html )

Compare living arrangements percentages with Department of Justice abuse cases percentages. "The percentage of the total validated cases which involved abuse was determined for each of seven household types: two natural parents, 34.4 percent; natural mother only, 21.2 percent; natural father only, 30.4 percent; other relatives, 30.9 percent; natural mother and father substitute, 54.2 percent; natural father and mother substitute, 59.1 percent; and adoptive or foster parents, 59.1 percent. These results suggest that household composition is highly relevant to the risk of abuse and neglect." ( https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/household-composition-and-risk-child-abuse-and-neglect )

So as far as exposure risk due to simply "living full time with your mom" is about 91.5% compared to 74.5% living full time with dad. While that's still not 2X, there are more factors...

If you were to also factor in employment data, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported in 2022 that "Employed fathers remained more likely to work full time than employed mothers in 2021—95.5 percent compared with 79.6 percent." ( https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/famee.pdf ) So mothers in general provide more childcare than fathers and spend much more time with children.

Finally, there's a huge difference physically, mentally, and spiritually between occasional lighter verbal abuse, severe verbal & psychological abuse, occasional spankings deemed physical abuse, and debilitating & near deadly physical abuse. There are trends by mothers & fathers in that data, as well. (Do your own research on this one.)

This doesn't make child abuse acceptable in any way, but does help explain some of the larger trends in raw number data. Just remember that raw count data is never as good as per capita data or percentage of incidents type data.

Totally appreciate your perspective and your devotion to helping kids in need. Sincerly, thank you!

At about 15, my precocious kid told me this about the boys at school who were having problems -

The aggressive knuckle head kids that are getting into fights tend to have had abandonment / absentee father stuff.

The quiet self-destructive kids - not aggressive but often intoxicated with whatever as often as possible. He said the kids that are dragging themselves around and are self-sabotaging are the ones with the mums who discarded or neglected them.

It seemed like a really insightful "ground truth". What are your thoughts, having lived with some of the kids?

It's interesting it has 'unmarried partner of parent'. Does this mean that a married stepfather is counted as a father?

[removed]

There are a lot of commenters here mid-reading this data to mean that mothers are the most likely person in a child’s life to PHYSICALLY abuse them.

It seems that many do not realize, that “neglect” is an abuse counted in this data (as it should be). If you accept that there is likely a positive correlation between poverty and single-mother homes then the presence of mothers at the top of the list is easily explained by that correlation.

This data is not evidence that mothers are more likely to hit their children. It is a small glimpse into the reality that the US system has a bias toward taking children from homes rather than providing the economic support we all deserve.

-Foster parent

I mean Tax Year and Income Period. Both have different switches but only two values so it is not clear which value is set.

Yes, I am aware of the doctrine and its damages.