Earlier this week, the UK's Daily Mirror reported that an eleven month old girl was mauled to death by a killer dog as she slept. The girl's 20 year old mother and her 26 year old boyfriend (the owner of the dog), were downstairs at the time of the attack, and have since been arrested for manslaughter.
The 24 year old father, who had split with the mother, was devastated. He said the girl's mother 'always told me that she would check with me before [the child] spent time round other men.'
Dangerous dogs are not the only threat to children. Sometimes the harm is meted out by those 'other' men themselves.
Studies of the incidence of child abuse show that children are at greater risk of harm when they do not live with both biological parents.
But as non-traditional family arrangements win broader social acceptance, there is an increasing reluctance to speak out about the dangers posed to children.
Patrick Parkinson, professor of law at the University of Sydney, reports that the ex-nuptial birth rate in Australia currently stands at an alarming 35% (up from around 6% in 1960). The figure for the UK is already 45%.
Approximately 27% of Australian children do not currently live with both natural parents (up from just 10% in 1960).
If that number continues to rise, faith in the traditional family structure will decline even more sharply.
Jeremy Sammut, research fellow at the CIS, cites US studies showing that children living with only one biological parent and a non-biological partner or boyfriend are many times more likely to experience sexual abuse.
But few pay attention to this issue. Broadening social acceptance of the non-traditional family means that the culture gradually embraces it.
According to Bettina Arndt, one problem is that so many people now influential in institutions like the ABC have themselves grown up in, or now live in, such arrangements.
Many of these influential people reject the traditions of family life and structure in the name of diversity. But they also refuse to face the devastating consequences of this moral disintegration.
Sammut calls it the 'new silence' which stems from the lasting influence on mainstream culture of the 1960s social revolution which fundamentally altered the social conventions governing marriage and the raising of children.
The social costs of refusing to break this new silence will continue to mount and children will continue to suffer.
We can do – and must do – much more to support children who are at risk.
It's time to heal our fractured families. We owe it to our kids.
Peter Kurti is a Research Fellow at The Centre for Independent Studies.
Home > Commentary > Opinion > Healing our fractured families
Healing our fractured families
The 24 year old father, who had split with the mother, was devastated. He said the girl's mother 'always told me that she would check with me before [the child] spent time round other men.'
Dangerous dogs are not the only threat to children. Sometimes the harm is meted out by those 'other' men themselves.
Studies of the incidence of child abuse show that children are at greater risk of harm when they do not live with both biological parents.
But as non-traditional family arrangements win broader social acceptance, there is an increasing reluctance to speak out about the dangers posed to children.
Patrick Parkinson, professor of law at the University of Sydney, reports that the ex-nuptial birth rate in Australia currently stands at an alarming 35% (up from around 6% in 1960). The figure for the UK is already 45%.
Approximately 27% of Australian children do not currently live with both natural parents (up from just 10% in 1960).
If that number continues to rise, faith in the traditional family structure will decline even more sharply.
Jeremy Sammut, research fellow at the CIS, cites US studies showing that children living with only one biological parent and a non-biological partner or boyfriend are many times more likely to experience sexual abuse.
But few pay attention to this issue. Broadening social acceptance of the non-traditional family means that the culture gradually embraces it.
According to Bettina Arndt, one problem is that so many people now influential in institutions like the ABC have themselves grown up in, or now live in, such arrangements.
Many of these influential people reject the traditions of family life and structure in the name of diversity. But they also refuse to face the devastating consequences of this moral disintegration.
Sammut calls it the 'new silence' which stems from the lasting influence on mainstream culture of the 1960s social revolution which fundamentally altered the social conventions governing marriage and the raising of children.
The social costs of refusing to break this new silence will continue to mount and children will continue to suffer.
We can do – and must do – much more to support children who are at risk.
It's time to heal our fractured families. We owe it to our kids.
Peter Kurti is a Research Fellow at The Centre for Independent Studies.
• Subscribe
Subscribe now and stay in the loop with our giving appeals, event alerts, newsletters and research updates.
We are always pleased to hear from you. If you have any questions or feedback, please contact us here: