TW To notice that a lot of child murders have one thing in common

[Worldinyourhands]

Has anyone else noticed the chilling common theme in the child murders that keep being reported (it feels like) in recent times? There's another today, and as soon as I read the heartbreaking report, that same factor jumped out yet again.

An unrelated partner being involved in the child's life. A parent and a boyfriend/girlfriend or (less commonly) new husband/wife.

Before anyone jumps on me, I'm obviously OBVIOUSLY not saying that step parents are all evil. Nor am I saying that biological parents can't be evil. In all the cases I'm thinking of, the biological parents were totally complicit.

But I am wondering if there needs to be some more red flags raised when school or social workers or whoever become aware that a child is having to live with a parent's romantic partner. Particularly a young child or a new partner, though I'm aware of at least one case involving a teenager (it broke my heart - I'm not naming any of the children on this post, but there have been multiple over the past few years). Not doing a poll either as it's too flippant.

But has anyone else noticed this factor coming up time and time again? And does anyone else think that this aspect of safeguarding seems to be missed - presumably because we place far too much value on the parent's perceived 'right' to have a live-in romantic partner and not enough weight on the chlld's right not to live with an unrelated adult who doesn't love them?

I mean.. Beinash Batool was stepmother. Emma Tustin was a stepmother. Victoria Climbies aunt was in a mum role.
It's almost always men but unfortunately there are plenty of high profile cases of women murdering children too.

There are 50 million children attending school in the United States. That's 8 billion school attendance days that happen each year. (50m children attending a 32-week school year.) In the 22 years 2000-2022, 197 children were killed by firearms at school. So out of the 8 billion school attendance days that happen per year, an average of 9 days of those days end with a child killed by a firearm.

Nine days out of 8 billion attendance days. The risk that a child will be shot dead at school is infinitesimally small. In fact, each child has a risk of 0.000018 percent per year. (9 out of 50m is 0.000018 percent.)

I don't think that a risk of 0.000018 percent qualifies as school being an "extremely dangerous, traumatising place for kids."

There are 335 million people in the US. 40k deaths per year by firearm is obviously terrible, as are the school deaths, but it's an extremely small portion of the population. 610,000 people die of cancer per year in the US. Being human and getting older is way, WAY more dangerous than firearms.

I'm not saying that firearm deaths don't matter or are inconsequential, far from it. 9 kids killed at school each year and 40k gun deaths overall a year are 49k deaths too many. But what I am saying is that it's important to keep risk in perspective. The fact remains that the vast majority of people in the US are not shot.

I don't think you've discovered anything new, sadly, but it also poses challenges for social services etc.

Indeed. @Worldinyourhands I think you forgot the other common denominator - the sex of the step-parent. Overwhelmingly men.

It's not just step dads. It's also the mothers who stand by and watch it happen. The mother of the little girl in the news at the moment pushed her dead body around in a pushchair for 3 days. The video footage shows her and the 'step dad' (very short term relationship ) messing about and laughing whilst doing so. She was a nursery nurse and within less than 2 months of introducing this 'man' her daughter was beaten to death.

It’s not something they miss or haven’t been pointed out, but this can’t be policed. In the tragic case in the press this week yes there was a step parent, but the main instigator was the bio father. I would never have a relationship with someone (ie move in) whilst my two youngest are under 18. I’ve been single 14yrs now, and youngest is coming up 17. Not just because of abuse, but because I don’t want the hassle that it brings.

I do also think that the parent that walks out in the children, provides no maintenance or child care should also be held responsible as they have out the resident parent in a very vulnerable situation.
I'm a single parent but my 15 year olds dad pays maintenance and my family are local and I have a well paid job but I have often thought of how difficult things would be without that. Also the emotional impact of being dumped and being left alone with children. It's a massive gift to have children but also hard when they are ill and there is no one to go and pick medication up so the sick child has to come out as well etc etc etc. I can see why these parents then end up in vulnerable situations with the first person that comes along and wants to "help" with the children and "love" all of them.
Obviously different if the biological parent knows about the abuse. In my opinion if the parent leaves and has no further contact with their children and then they end up getting abused that biological parent is as responsible as the biological parent that has let the abuser into the house. Obviously the actual abuser is main person to blame.
I've chosen to live without a partner whilst my teenagers live at home although I do have a boyfriend I see outside the house a couple times a week. Someone with young children and no babysitter couldn't do that. So I think it's huge for a parent to walk out condemning the other parent to a life on their own for at least 18 years if they want their children to be safe. Some people manage amazingly but for those who are vulnerable anyway and have no support it's a difficult situation to be left in.

It's very hard to ignore the anecdotal evidence on this. I can't think of a single case where a child experiencing newsworthy abuse was in the care of both biological parents. I think maybe there was one recently in America where `Christian fundamentalists abused a whole family but that seems to have been the exception.

When I first read this post my thoughts immediately sprang to my own childhood and I felt defensive. - My mum left my biological father when I was a newborn back in 1960 and moved in with the man that became my stepdad until he eventually adopted me. I loved him and always felt lucky to have had him in my life.
However I've gradually come to realise that although he was a constant, loving force he also failed to protect me from my mum's (relatively) low level emotional and physical abuse over the years. It was as if her being the bio parent gave her superior rights over me and he didn't feel capable of stepping in to protect me when she went over the top.

It's really hard to acknowledge this even at my age and in an anonymous forum but the reality is that my mum was an abuser and my much loved adoptive father let it happen. I loved him but I have to accept he failed me.

So my experience was slightly different to the majority in that it wasn't a male stepparent abusing me but a male stepparent not stopping biological maternal abuse.

Sorry, but this is rubbish.

Something like 85/90% of victims of sexual abuse are female. Perpetrators are pretty much all male (or male with support from a woman).

If previous abuse is a trigger to become an abuser, then why do the statistics not show 90% female Perpetrators?🤔

I'm fed up with people excusing male violence and setting the bar for behaviour on the floor.

Also, how are judges repeatedly letting men convicted of possession of the grimest child r4pe images to walk free.

I would be a terrible stepparent. I wouldn't abuse anyone physically but I would probably inflict mental abuse withiut knowing it. I would never love anyone else's kids like my own, so I will never get into a relationship with someone who has children.

Agree.
Females are more emotionally manipulated.

Looks as though you know yourself very well. Which is highly commendable!!

I think it's very noble of you to put your children first above all. You looked at the risks and made a decision. Hope it all works out for you.

Well I am in my fifties now, so easy for me to say as I don't expect anyone will have me! I am ok on my own, if anything happens to my marriage.

I have found parenting much tougher than I expected, so I assume other peoples kids- even adult ones- are super challenging.

Excellent point.

No I’ve met a few evil stepmothers along the way as well. One that used to grab the baby by the mouth and pull her mouth apart so that the kid couldn’t eat or speak for days without pain but there wasn’t a mark on her.

And just general bad treatment, not allowing them to use the toilet making them look after their younger siblings that were her children not related to the little girl. It’s just awful.

I get this but I remember text exchanges in one case where the partner said things like “I smacked her one” and the mother was like “give her another for me” sort of thing, child was beaten to death.

I think there are a lot of mothers who once aware that someone is a danger to their children will risk abject poverty to prevent harm coming to their children. It takes something to ignore a grown man beating your toddler. So yeah once you know and you keep putting your child into harms way you are allowing it to happen. If an adult male left bruises on my DD and I shrugged and kept leaving her in his care I would not be doing my job as a mother, who else will do it if I don’t?

I do think these women are often vulnerable but some of them literally do not care about their children more than they care about having a boyfriend. I can’t stop men from being violent and they own their own behaviour but my job is to safeguard my child, it’s the most fundamental of parental responsibilities. I mean if you know someone is a paedophile would you leave your kid with them?

If anything happened to DH theres no way I would have a man in my house until DD was gone. It’s not worth the risk.

You are correct, OP.

For that reason, since being a single mum, I have never allowed a man to have any status above 'visitor' in my house and that will continue until my DS goes to university or has his own home.

The only man I have got closer to in the last 10 years actually told me to 'get rid of my DS half the time if I wanted our relationship to progress'. Ds was 9 at the time.😡. It took me a nanosecond to take that decision and dump him. Just one more arrogant selfish creep found his arse on the pavement.

Urghh, men !

Dating is now always away from our home and is never more than light hearted and superficial.

It is not always the stepdad, if you look at figures from WomensAid, you will find that non resident parents score high as well.

The problem is that women with abusive men in their lives, tend to model “love” on the male figures around them, so if you have an abusive dad or husband, you are likely programmed to believe that control, anger, etc is a sign that someone “cares”.

Breaking this cycle without professional intervention is extremely difficult. While you may be indirectly placing the blame on single mums finding a new partner, the truth is more complex than that:

If you allow your children to be abused by choosing to stay with your abusive husband/partner, if you insist they have a relationship with grandparents or other relatives who you know are horrible, you are teaching your kids that abuse is a normal part of a relationship and that something is lacking if no drama is involved.

Good for you and other women should take note. This is how you do it.

If you're talking about Sara Sheriff then the other thing they have in common is that Family Court gave contact \custody to the abuser so went on to kill them.

But homeschool is being blamed because the Children's Commissioner for England has it in for SEND children and their families

We are all animals. Highly intelligent apes but driven by the same primal urges as other animals. We use our intelligence to control our impulses but they can’t be ignored.

Animals protect their offspring. Often males will destroy existing offspring as the primal urge is to reproduce but not to support the offspring of another male. in fact nurturing their own young isn’t as much of a priority as trying to seek status amongst other males and find more females to reproduce with.

Ridiculous over simplification I know but the human evolution mostly led us to customs which recognised the importance of careful selection of a mate before commitment to childbearing (marriage). The current ‘anything goes’ attitude to family structures is risky for many children. I am baffled why so many women don’t think it’s important to be with someone for at least a couple of years and ensure commitment before risking a child. I suppose the benefits system removes much of the risk.

Mothers and children are vulnerable and men are risky! Choose wisely. Especially if you already have children. But if it all goes wrong it’s (probably) not your fault. I hate that argument that women should have picked a better man. We are (almost all) doing our very best.

Or my mother.

I think one thing to look at is not just the stats about step parents but that abusers will find ways to abuse.

Abusers will go in to careers / hobbies to get access to children, getting in to a relationship with a woman with children is an easier way to access children.

It's good to be cautious but you do not have to live like a nun until your children are adults (unless you want to). You can be in a relationship without living together. And after time when you feel you can trust him around your then older children you can live together. Not all men are predators. Most of them aren't thank god. I think what's problematic when "mum meets new man" is that they move in together too soon instead of taking things slowly.

Recent statistics from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) regarding Child Homocide.
Key Statistics:
Gender:

• Male: 29
• Female: 19

.