Man are in paid labour from graduation until retirement. This belief tells us that mens are neither supposed to or allowed to
be dependent, rather they are expected to take care of others and themselves. When they cannot, or will not do it, the
building assumption is that they are less then men and unworthy of help. Consider an illustration: attitudes toward
homeless varies depending on their gender. Homeless women and children are seen as victims, homeless/unemployed men
are likely to evoke contempt and sometimes violence. For societies that grant men the power to act, also demands agency
from them. Dominant attitudes toward homeless in Canada: Get A Job.
Mate selection embedded in Ideology of Separate Spheres. Men and women have been encouraged to look at different
things when looking at a partner. Men look for women that have potential to run a household, fertile, appealing sex partner,
companion. Women look for men who are providers, wealthy and high status, depends on structure of her life.
Marriage Gradient/Dating Differential: we are actually still impacted by these ideas in relation to the qualities we look for
in an ideal partner. Many of the qualities that men and women look for have remained the same since earlier times. This
concept refers to a rank ordering from low to high of all the qualities that we consider desirable for a mate. The practice of
selecting a partner more highly ranked as oneself is called hypergamy; lower ranked partner is hypogamy. The most
frequently occurring scenario involves female hypergamy (woman marrying a man of slightly superior social
characteristics). Women are encouraged to select someone who has a better education, occupation prestige, higher income,
larger in size (taller and older). This kind of man is a matrimonial jackpot.
Men are more corny. They believe that love is all powerful and they are more likely to believe in love at first sight and
blah. They are more likely to suffer from “love sickness” after relationship is over.
Women: LIFO (Last In First Out). Men: FILO (First In Last Out) of relationships. Men are more willing to work things
Women make distinctions between liking/loving as friend or liking/loving as relationship.
Historically, hypergamy and hypogamy result in two different pools. Women occupy the upper gradient have found few
men to look up to as perspective partners and men who are at lowest rankings have few women to look down on. They are
more likely to remain single (high status women and low status men). Men more likely to get divorced based on declining
Now, women who have high status are more likely to marry now opposed to those who have low socioeconomic status.
Both men and women who are employed or financially secure as seen as more attractive marriage partners because of
resources they can bring.
Surveys show that young men are more unwilling to marry a women who does not have or show promise of obtaining
steady employment. Illustration: when researchers posted four female seeking male ads, more popular was woman saying
she was financially secure and successful and ambitious. This ad produced 50% more responses than next most popular ad,
in which woman was lovely and very attractive and slim. The emphasis on notion of a home wife has decreased and hard to
be a sole breadwinner. Emphasis on men is being a good provider.
Men who don’t have jobs or are laid off are expected to pick up chores and look for a job. Men are often accused of
focusing upon work role and neglecting their families. According to the logical, it is through the work role and gainful
employment, that a man best serves his family as a financial income. Men successfully socialize into male work model do
care about families, work as an institution is not family friendly and the structure of work may be responsible for many
outcomes that are blamed solely on males unwillingness to sweep floor or unload dishwasher or cut coupons.
Tax changes to account for women’s ability to pursue employment and attain childcare is an important thing to do.
However as of right now women who are self employmed business people cannot write off nanny’s wages as business, but
Female lone parents feel they take on breadwinning roles. Typically not something they plan for or relish.
March 6 2012 Law of Twelve Tables – Ancient Rome – prohibited parents from raising a child with a deformity or defect.
Ancient Sparta – kids being taken before a local council of Elders who had power to kill these children if they were
Middle Ages – parents deliberately mutilated children in order to maximize profit of sending kid out to beg.
Industrial Revolution – forced children to work in factories, shackling them, beat them. None of these acts were considered
indicative of child abuse, but legitimate methods of child rearing with kids thought of as property of parents rather than its
Mary-Ellen Wilson case – recent violence against kids case. 1874 – 8 year old was discovered by a social worker to have
been systematically and horrifically starved and beaten by her adoptive parents. Social worker in turn referred the case to
NYCPD but that agency refused to take action because there were no laws that addressed the abuse of children by parents.
In order to save her, the city filed charges against the adoptive parents using a statute that prohibited cruelty to animals.
Their argument that as much as a cat or a dog, Mary Ellen was also an animal who warranted protection from abuse.
Eventually, Mary Ellen’s step mother received a year in jail for her treatment of her. The publicity this case attracted was
the event that was to provide the ushering of the first North American law that addressed cruelty to children. Also lead to
Society of Cruelty to Children in 1875. This society was predated by Society of Cruelty to Animals. Moreover, most would
argue that widespread acceptance of notion that parents can treat their children in a way that should be classified as abuse
as opposed to as a firm hand or with strong discipline.
1961 – discovery of child abuse in America. Radiologist saw x rays that revealed numerous fractures on children, called
“Battered Child Syndrome”. Describes diagnosis by medical expert that is based upon the presentation of evidence that the
child has sustained continuing injuries and that these injuries were not accidental.
Jeffrey Baldwin – (movie) – even when physical evidence of abuse, individuals are capable of explaining a way that will
impel an act and to understand this, we might consider how non-intervention in the case of family violence targets children
but more broadly any family member may be urged upon us in a host of social influences. One might consider in this
context the many cultural dictates and guidelines that we see in our society, or who and when we should intervene when
someone is victimized.
Society is virtue on non involvement.
Installs theme of repentence, turning other cheek, offering second change. Implicit message is when we encounter an act of
family violence and especially if we assured by the perpetrator that is won’t happen again, we are encouraged to ignore the
rule violation and look the other way.
Different religions – some use harsh physical punishment to discipline a child.
We may feel as lay persons that is not our job to do anything that involved sanctioning.
Don’t want to bash your family.
Failure to act immediately when this behavior is perceieved leads to self-censor: when you first see abuse behavior you are
increasingly less likely to do so in the future. Most people like to act consisitently over time, we feel anxious and
uncomfortable for us to account why is was okay before opposed to now.
Identifying child abuse might be harder than you think. ie Babysitting – you notice bruises or welts that seem to be in
various stages, various areas – is it abuse? Maybe. Bruises not always indicators of abuse. Mongolian spots are an irregular
area of deep blue pigmentation usually on back or butt, seen predominantly in new borns, Aboriginal or Asian or African
or Latino decent. Allergic shiners are an allergic reaction, acute contact dermatitis, might look like a bruise but isn’t.
Location is important for a bruise – front of leg, arms, faces can be consisitent with normal childhood nonsense, especially
if they occur on boney places.
If on back of arms and legs, back, abdomen, genitals, any of soft tissue area – more suggestive of child abuse. Bruise
patterns also may help distinguish between abuse and accidents. Bilateral black eyes, pull and pinch mark on ears, hand
imprints on cheeks, upper lip, bald patches of scalp, choke marks on neck, bruising on upper arm, defensive wounds on arms, finger tip bruises on inner thighs, pinch marks, scratches, lacerations on genitals, marks on wrists and ankles,
children under age of 3: burns result in burn area that looks like a mitt or sock – linked to unsuccessful potty training if
burn marks on butt if child forced into tub of extremely hot water. If not restrained (accident) then it has spatter marks.
Accidnetal burns are not symmetrical, deep on one side, spatter marks. Can sometimes find burn marks from cigarettes on
head that are self inflicted, never on genitals, abdomen.
Spiral fractures don’t occur by getting their limbs stuck on something, it’s abuse. Head injuries that are life threatening –
kid would have had to fall 15 feet – it’s abuse.
Shaken Baby Syndrome – neurological damage caused by shaking baby violently. “Whiplash shaken baby syndrome” –
caretaker is shaking baby back and force with head being whipped, causing brain to move inside skull, causing cerebral
concussion, or subdural hemotoma and death. Fathers are double as likely to shake babies, most common young parents
with lack of parenting experience.
Sexual abuse – rarely presents with physical evidence, not often penetrated, do not leave a lot of evidence. Interfamilial
sexual abuse leads to substance abuse, doing poorly in school, change in emotions, etc.
A child is in need of protection where the child has suffered physical harm, inflicted by the person having charge of the
child or caused by or resulting from that person’s: failure to care for, provide for, protect child or pattern of neglect in
caring for, providing for, supervising or protecting the child; there is a risk that the child is likely to suffer physical harm
inflicted by the person’s having charge of the child to caused by or resulting from that person’s; failure to adequately care
for, provide for, supervise or protect child or pattern of neglect in caring for, providing for , supervising or protecting the
child; the child has been sexually molested or sexually exploited, by the person having charge of the child or by another
person where the person having charge of the child knows or should have known of the possibility of sexual molestation or
exploitation and fails to protect the child.
Also have to factor in individual’s ideas how kids should be raised, what is permissible and deplorable; it should be
obvious that all the things listed should be interpreted ad put into action.
Dion quintuplets – 1934 – they became instant celebrities because they were first quintuplets to survive infancy. Ontario
government saw fit to intervene when they were 6 months old, because they saw that the parents were unfit because the
parents were unsuited to ensure the children would have a healthy childhood. They were separated for 9 years under the
“Dion Quintuplet Guardian Act”. This act allowed the government to make the children wards of the provincial crown and
were to remain so until they were 18. IN order to safeguard the best interest and protect them, the kids were severely
restricted from having contact with parents, only allowed partial custody. The government made them a tourist attraction.
Across their birthplace was a hospital being built – had 5 girls living with caretakers with playground intended to function
as public observation area, one way screens to view them, surrounded with 7 foot tall barbed wire fence. Supervised by
police, nurses, housekeeper, maids. Minimal contact with parents or other five siblings. Estimated between 1936-1943,
almost 3 million Canadians visited “Quintland” to see them and purchase souvenirs. Also in 4 movies. Mother Dion took to
selling stones at 50 cents each as guaranteed to enhance your fertility. First year alone, quintuplets brought in 1 million
dollars and there were all sorts of endorsements
March 13 2012
Ontario’s Child Welfare Act talks about all kinds of things that should merit tension and should direct us to consider their
emotional, physical, cultural etc well being. Actuality, it guarantees very little. Defines whether a child should be in need
of protection. Contents are less clear than one supposes. It guarantees them the minimum.
When we feel we should say something about child neglect – Within a criminal code, legitimation and sanction for parents
or guardians to use a reasonable degree of force for their correction. If one wonders how are you supposed to know when
corporal punihsments constitutes a reasonable degree of force, and when it should impel one to help a child at risk who may be subject to child abuse, the question actually defines a clear answer: what one suspects to be child abuse may be
what another thinks is permissible.
Section 43 of code shows basic rules of thumb or what is permissible as to using physical force as discipline: force used
must be applied for purposes of correction (anger is not allowed,); child must be capable of benefitting from correction
(exempts kids under age of 2, those incapable of appreciating lesson they are trying to teach them, ie 11 year old child with
Down Syndrome – not allowed to use Section 43 in your defense); force is reasonable under circumstances (reasonable
man standard: what would a standard person think was acceptable in a situation); the nature of the preceding event is not
relevant (ie if your child is rude to you verbally, you cannot use force on them).
Violence Against Children and Youth, 2009. In 2009, police reported almost 55,000 children and youth victims (0-17
years) of a physical assault of sexual offence. 214 children and youth victims of family violence for every 100,000 persons
aged 0-17 years in 2009.
Sexual Offence: includes sexual assault (level 1), sexual assault with a weapon or causing bodily harm (level 2),
aggravated sexual assault (level 3), and the “other sexual crimes” category. The term “other sexual crimes” includes a
group of offences that primarily address incidents of sexual abuse directed at children such as: sexual interference, sexual
exploitation, invitation to sexual touching and incest.
Physical assault: Includes common assault (level 1), assault with a weapon or causing bodily harm (level 2), aggravated
assault (level 3), unlawfully causing bodily harm, discharge firearm with intent, criminal negligence causing bodily harm
and other assaults.
*Level of assault has to do with amount of violence involved.
Level 1 – child luring, sexual interference, invitation to sexual touching, power imbalance between victim and
Incest: blood relation. Has to be vaginal/penal penetration. Based on heterosexual relations.
Majority of child assault cases were level 1 physical assault. 1/5 assaults are level 3. 1/3 are sexual assaults, majority were
level 1. Level 2 and 3 sexual assaults account for <1% of assaults against kids.
Family members victimize girls more often than boys. Overall, police reported data shows that girls under age of 18 in
Canada to be victims of family violence. This statistic is driven by sexual offences. Rate of sexual offenses by family
members in 2009 were 4x higher for girls that boys; this higher rate held true across age spectrum. (Issue: are girls targeted
more or are cases with girls more serious than with boys?)
Rates of physical assault that were perpetrated against males and females by family members were closer than those of sex
offenses. Girls and boys are physical assaulted about the same.
For both girls and boys, the rate for physical and sexual assault is highest during teenage years.
General social survey: population was couples were married or common law, or had contact with an ex-partner over the
past five years. The questions measure physical and sexual assault in some ways. In theory, it would be possible to identify
the people as individuals who are victims of assault and whose offenders could have been charged for engaging in those
acts. At the same time, not all of the forms of spousal violence that the GSS ask questions about are actually criminal
offenses. Also asks about emotional abuse (not a crime, not a crime with kids either).
Spousal violence rates in Canada have been stable since 2004. 19% of Canadians who have had spousal abuse, about 6%
reported they had been physically or sexually victimized by spouse in five years before survey, also remained stable. Many
reported it was recurring, with under ½ victims who said they had experienced spousal abuse also saying that violence had
occurred on more than one occasion; females more likely to report abuse; more often occurs between ex-partners than
current partners. Similar across all provinces; however Newfoundland, Quebec are lower than national average. Survey
from Alberta: 1/10 men in Alberta think it is okay to hit a woman.
Females reported more serious violence than males; more likely to report they have been sexually assaulted, have a gun or
knife used against them, or beaten/shoved. 1/5 victims of spousal violence said they had been assaulted. Common law
couples 3x more likely to experience violence. Children in blended families more likely to witness violence between adult caretakers. Those who self identify as gay and lesbian are twice as likely to report experiencing sexual violence. Those
who identify as bisexual 4x more likely than heterosexual to report spousal violence, those who have activity limitation
such as physical disability, mental condition, health problem have heightened likelihood to experience spousal violence
with this phenomenon being referred to as sexism without a pedestal. Aboriginals are another risk factor, twice as likely to
report spousal violence as victim. Those who report as visible minority or immigrant, no higher likelihood of being subject
to spousal violence. Those are immigrants are less likely to report being a victim.
Household income, education levels have little to no impact on likelihood that one will experience spousal violence.
Victims and perpetrators no more likely to be university grads than to drop out of school; no significant difference among
income groups. All these factors influence whether a person will report spousal violence. Consistently found that ¼ of
those who experienced spousal violence would say they didn’t tell police about it. In recent years, the amount of Canadians
who said they reported victimization has decreased. Most incidents reported by victims themselves are more likely to
report they contacted police to stop the violence. People rarely call to see someone punished. Most common reason by
females and males but did not opt to report was the same: belief that what had happened was a personal matter; family is a
private sphere that should not be made public.
Unofficial types of support or help were most often accessed. People most often called upon were family members, friends,
neighbours, with females more likely to seek support. Fewer victims said they used formal victim services in 2009 than
2004. Reasons for not accessing with the belief that they didn’t need the help and the incident was minor.
Bruises most common physical injury; name calling is most common type of verbal abuse.
Family violence against seniors: family violence against seniors is lower than younger age groups. In general, seniors have
lower amounts of police reported incidents and also true in proportion to family violence. Spouses and grown children
most often to be abused; senior men more often subject to violent crime; violent crime in family related context was more
likely to be female than men; senior woman as likely to be victimized by grown child than spouse. Spousal violence has
grown old. Most seniors did not have any harm done to them; where senior received injury it was minor; only 2% required
Old Canadians are less at risk than violent crime by family members than younger counterparts. Most advanced age = more
likely to live far away.
15-24 has highest spousal homicide rate; 25-34 next. Males most likely killed by common law; females by married.
Stabbings most common method used by far to commit spousal homicide – more likely used against males than females.
Females more likely to be shot or beaten or strangled. Parents commit majority of family related homicides against
children. Infants (<1 year of age) more likely to be killed by family members – about triple than next age group.
Young children under age of 4 most likely shaken or beaten to death. Older kids most often killed with weapons.
Homicides against seniors have decreased. Canada’s seniors are more likely to be killed by non-family members.
Older women more likely to be killed husbands, followed by sons. Older men killed by sons. Motive for family related
homicide against senior: frustration, anger, despair. Motive for non family: financial gain.
March 20 2012
Divorce in Canada prior to the Divorce Act of 1968
“Patch work” display.
Provincial variation in “at fault marital offences”. Allowed in some provinces but not others.
In Quebec, Canadian Senate had sole legal authority for divorce until first federal divorce act came into existence.
Roman Catholic Church had impact in Quebec on divorce. Quebec: Couples who wanted divorce had to file petition with Senate of Canada providing proof that ones spouse had
committed a matrimonial offence (ie adultery, deserted you) as a ground. Special committee of the Senate would review
and if found that the evidence was compelling, the marriage would be ended by an act of Parliament. This was a long and
Ontario: English Law influenced. Family law influenced by Dogma of England. General rule was marriage was an
indissolvable contract. Divorce was seen as a violation of a legal contract. Called “at fault marital offences” were
recognized as legitimate grounds for the severing of a marital contract.
From time of Confederation until Divorce Act, the only legally recognized ground for divorce across Canadian
jurisdictions was adultery. There were considerable variations that were believed to warrant divorce in various provinces.
Nova Scotia: recognized cruelty as a legitimate ground for divorce even prior to Confederation.
New Brunswick: wife’s virginity and husband’s impedance that would inhibit procreation were believed also to be
deserving of a divorce. A discovery of a blood relation between spouses was considered legitimate grounds for divorce.
Divorce Act of 1968
Fault ground: what constituted “at fault marital offences” under this Act? No fault divorce?