• Homicide Takes Toll of Great Newspapers

    Email Print
    Share

    “Many
    New or Expectant Mothers Die Violent Deaths.” With this front-page
    headline atop a three-page spread in its Sunday edition, the Washington
    Post initiates a three-part series describing not so much a
    serious social problem as the further decline of liberal journalism,
    as a once-great newspaper descends to the ranks of the gutter press.

    The
    credibility of news organizations like the Post is already
    in tatters by revelations of either gullibility or mendacity. Now
    the Post seems to think it can salvage its reputation by
    posing as the champion of (what else?) pregnant mothers and children.
    The ploy is brilliant in its way: clothing an ideologically driven
    hate campaign in the cloak of compassion for motherhood. Perhaps
    they are acting on the advice of Adolph Hitler, who suggested that
    if you are going to tell a lie, you are less likely to get caught
    telling a big one. At least one conservative news organization swallowed
    it: LifeSiteNews.com took the Post’s left spin and re-spun
    it right: “The men who fathered the unborn children killed with
    their mothers are often the perpetrators of the homicides, after
    they have insisted on abortions but their partners have refused.”

    Anyone
    who sees this as a defense of motherhood is as gullible as Dan Rather.
    It is an appeal to emotion and fear, an effort to terrify women
    away from motherhood by suggesting a “convergence of pregnancy and
    homicide” that does not exist. Already the series is creating hysteria
    on Internet forums.

    The
    Post acknowledges it has not a shred of evidence that pregnant women
    are in any more danger of murder than anyone else. Its material
    is entirely anecdotal. Each installment consists of three pages
    of lurid, gruesome stories, with the names of alleged victims displayed
    in BOLD CAPITALS, like a war memorial. “Researchers Stunned By Scope
    of Slayings,” it announces. This is Jerry Springer journalism.

    As
    Jack Shafer points out in Slate, the first word in the headline
    is a suspect journalistic crutch for creating the appearance of
    news where none exists: How many is “many”? The Post concedes
    that “the cases are not commonplace compared with other homicides,
    but are more frequent than most people know.” Arguing against what
    “most people know” (as if a Post reporter can be privy to
    the thoughts of millions) is another trick for sensationalizing
    the mundane into the illusion of news.

    Though
    nameless researchers are invoked to lend the cachet of social science,
    the story is based on the Post’s own compilation of 1,367
    maternal homicides over 14 years, less than a hundred a year throughout
    the United States, of which it estimates seventy are pregnancy-related.

    The
    Census Bureau reports that 3.8 million women gave birth during 2002.
    If seventy were murdered during this year, a pregnant woman in America
    has about a one in 54,000 chance of being murdered. According to
    the Bureau of Justice Statistics, during 2002 there were 6 murder
    victims per 100,000 population, so the average American had a one
    in 17,000 chance of being a victim. It would appear that pregnant
    women are more than three times as safe as the average American.
    To deal with this, the Post suggests tripling the documented
    cases; even so, pregnant women are still safer than average.

    Moreover,
    despite what the paper insinuates, the victims are not spread evenly
    among the population. As Richard Davis of Family Nonviolence Inc.
    points out, most victims live with heightened risk factors such
    as disadvantaged neighborhoods, financial stress, or partners with
    a history of violence, criminality, or psychological problems.

    Even
    more questionable, the reader must wade through this massive article
    to discover that half the “pregnant” women were not, in fact, pregnant.
    This supposed slaughter of innocents is based on “an expanded definition
    of what qualifies as deaths associated with pregnancy – up to 12
    months postpartum.”

    This
    is cooking the books on a grand scale. First, it doubles the population
    from which the cases were drawn, so a woman’s risk factor in this
    expanded group is actually between one in 38,000 and one in 108,000,
    less than one-half to one-sixth the national average.

    But
    more seriously, it suggests we are seeing something completely different
    from what the Post fervently wants us to see. Apparently
    able to read to people’s thoughts, the Post often reiterates
    that expectant fathers are perpetrating this mayhem to evade the
    responsibilities of fatherhood. “When husbands or boyfriends attack
    pregnant partners, it usually has to do with an unwillingness to
    deal with fatherhood, marriage, child support, or public scandal,”
    we are told. “If she goes away, the problem goes away.” But this
    makes no sense. Most perpetrators are arrested, convicted of murder,
    and sentenced to decades in prison. As Davis remarks, “The problem
    does not go away.”

    What
    the “expanded definition” indicates is that most are already fathers
    who are more likely trying to exercise, not evade, the responsibilities
    of fatherhood. What the Post is clothing in sympathy for
    pregnant women is much more likely to be violence over custody and
    children forcibly separated from their fathers. A significant moral
    difference separates a man who kills to avoid fatherhood from a
    father who kills because someone has taken away or otherwise interfered
    with his children. Justified or not, a completely different dynamic
    is at work.

    It
    is fairly clear that what we are really seeing here is part of a
    much larger phenomenon of truly serious dimensions that the Post
    both ignores and distorts: divorce-related violence. Drexel University
    researchers, seeking a correlation between homicide and unemployment,
    found instead that “the most powerful predictor of homicide rates
    in the United States are the divorce rates.” Most of this is directly
    connected with custody of children. “Judges and lawyers nationwide
    agree,” reports the California Law Week, “that family law
    is the most dangerous area in which to practice.” Dakota County
    Minnesota District Attorney James Backstrom attests that family
    court produces far more violence than criminal court. “We’re most
    concerned about the people in family court – the child support and
    divorce cases,” he says. “They pose a greater risk than the criminal
    defendants.”

    While
    fathers are demonized in this series, they are far from the only
    ones becoming violent. Only days earlier, the Post itself
    reported on a mother convicted of trying to murder her husband “to
    gain custody of two young boys.” Of course, the Laci Peterson case
    is presented as typical. Yet the day before the series ran, headlines
    were dominated by a pregnant woman killed by another woman. Such
    cases are not mentioned in the series. The killers are apparently
    all (in capital letters with ungrammatical but dramatic stops) “Husbands.
    Boyfriends. Lovers.”

    Further
    complicating the violence, as Davis points out, “Data document that
    one in four domestic violence homicides is actually a homicide/suicide.
    When the homicide involves both the children and spouse, approximately
    half of those homicides result in a homicide/suicide.” This too
    suggests a strong connection with custody disputes. The sharp increase
    in male suicide is largely custody-related, as psychologist Augustine
    Kposowa has documented in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community
    Health.

    This
    kind of distortion has become a pattern at the Post. In April
    2003, the paper reported that “one out of every three women” experiences
    domestic violence. But the Post’s definition of “violence”
    is curious. The victims were “abused verbally, mentally, emotionally,
    and-or physically by their partners.” So most of this domestic “violence,”
    it turns out, is not actually violent. It is verbal, mental, and
    emotional (“or” physical). In other words, it is a violation of
    no law and not criminal but whatever the “victim” says it is. In
    fact, no evidence indicates that women are the only or even the
    primary victims of domestic violence, and a quarter century of academic
    research attests they are not. It is well established that most
    domestic violence arises during divorce and child custody. An intact
    family is the safest place for women and children. In another meaningless
    statistic, the Post claimed, “Child abuse occurs in 70% of
    families that experience domestic violence.” It is firmly established
    that child abuse takes place overwhelmingly in the homes of single
    mothers; in other words, a father is the natural protector of his
    children. The Post also claimed that “More than 503,400 women
    in the United States are stalked by an intimate partner each year.”
    But the US Justice Department defines stalking as any “nonconsensual
    communication.” Legally, according to DOJ, a father trying to phone
    his children is “stalking.”

    Even
    more scurrilous, just before Fathers’ Day 2001 the Post launched
    a gratuitous attack on separated fathers with a similar front-page
    spread on some that allegedly became violent. By ranging through
    twelve states the Post managed to find twelve violent fathers,
    most of whom had their children taken away before they became violent.
    The Post falsely tried to create the appearance of an epidemic
    of violence by fathers where none existed. The fact that the Post
    must manufacture its case with lurid anecdotes and misleading statistics
    is itself a strong indication that it has none.

    The
    Post is far from unique among once-reputable news organizations.
    In April 2003, PBS broadcast a tedious seven-hour documentary, which
    faithfully parroted one government cliché after another but
    never questioned the government’s official line on domestic violence,
    which is that it is perpetrated only by men against women. “Whatever
    the woman says is what we believe,” the film approvingly shows one
    police officer saying as a man is led away in handcuffs. At about
    the same time, the BBC broadcast an astounding ten-day blitz on
    domestic violence that Melanie Phillips of the Daily Mail
    called “a propaganda onslaught…with men targeted for attack here
    by what might be described as gender fascism.”

    A
    few years ago, bumper stickers were common in the Washington area
    reading, “I don’t believe the Post.” Recall that it was the
    Post that initiated the current wave of journalistic hoaxes
    with “Jimmy’s World,” Janet Cooke’s Pulitzer Prize-winning but fabricated
    tale of an 8-year-old heroine addict. Post reporter Donna
    St. George is more subtle but no less mendacious and probably far
    more destructive.

    For
    the consequences are not harmless. Similar selective use of evidence
    is used not only by journalists but by courts in custody proceedings
    throughout the United States, where fathers are accused of “violence”
    that everyone in the courtroom knows did not take place. These men
    lose their children, homes, savings, and future earnings, and they
    are incarcerated – all without trial and with little semblance
    of due process. Now they are even ordered to sign confessions on
    pain of incarceration. No one even denies this is taking place.
    Domestic violence hysterics only insist that, as always, the end
    justifies the means. No news organization exposes these miscarriages
    of justice in nine-page spreads or seven-hour documentaries.

    Expect
    to see more reporting like this. The aim is to renew funding for
    the Violence Against Women Act, a massive expansion of federal police
    power that not only permits officials to trample federalist principles
    and Bill of Rights protections but provides generous financial incentives
    for them to do so.

    This
    reporting fulfills the worst stereotype of hysterical women, and
    illustrates the damage they can do in positions of public trust.
    By publishing this pretentious spectacle, the Post declares
    itself to be a newspaper for such women. It is a well-known principle
    that when any institution becomes associated primarily with women,
    men will abandon it in droves. Myriad news sources are now available
    for men and women who prefer the truth. The Post is already
    said to be losing 4,000 subscribers a month. I suggest it is time
    men and honest women simply refuse to buy, read, or pay further
    credence to any reports of the Washington Post.

    January
    7, 2005

    Stephen
    Baskerville
    [send him mail]
    is a political scientist at Howard University and president of the
    American Coalition for Fathers and Children.

    Email Print
    Share