Amaris can rejoice: Murders of cops were up 59% in 2021

Since you're so obsessed, go on and check my user account if that place still exists. I got bored very quickly.

If it was just me, then sure, but that's the case for abuse survivors more often than not.

'Course, 40 percent of cops beat their own families, so whaddyagonnado?

why is it "willfully"?

Bubble wrap seems a fair assessment as you're so simplistic as to presume others have had all the security you had so as not to have fallen off that solid street.

Remember when you used to be fun?
Yeah, me neither.

You didn't say anything about abuse. Anecdotally, the Duluth Model still seems to hold up whether justified or not. I would have questions if someone was getting their ass beat and the cops did nothing, and usually what they do is assume the man is the abuser.

If you swallowed, smoked or injected it yourself, it is willful.

Must be an abundance of security and an easy life, right? Couldn't be that some people manage to not completely fucking fold every time in the face of adversity. Gotta be comforted by the assumption that everyone is equally susceptible.

yup... bubble wrap

what the fuck is that word salad?

If your entire standard of proof is what you pull out of your ass, I guess.

English, motherfucker.

same standard of proof you offer when it comes to "willfully" and "single parent homes" /shrug

Single parent homes correlate pretty strongly with behavioral problems and negative outcomes. Not sure where you're going with that.

What is there to prove about "willful"? Either someone else stuck that needle in your arm, or you did it your fucking self. I've heard plenty of sob stories about pain pills prescribed for some injury, then turning to something illegal when the prescription ran out. Predatory pharma companies and blah blah blah...you still had to choose to take the pills. You still had to choose to steer away from the pain of withdrawal. People have kicked every substance under the sun with nothing but willpower.

it was one of your race baiting dog whistles...

so we can presume you've never suffered a major injury? I'm just not sure where you're going or what the point is that you've somehow managed to avoid an opioid addiction? That any poor choice should define and limit a person for life? that nobody deserves help, even though we have the capacity?

I just don't get why you're such a sanctimonious bitch other than you have little to no first hand experience with any of this.

See, I'm in harm reduction. My whole gig is about mitigating the inevitable. I don't know why or how clients develop their habits... don't really care. They've all got different stories from the most mundane to the most tragic.

Only because limited data is collected. The UK did a study over 4 or 5 decades. The truth is, behavioral problems and negative outcomes have more to do with inattentive parents than having a single parent.

we've got one regular. she's kind of a washed up party girl who injects and hasn't been properly taken care of in years. She shows up after clearly being horribly abused.

her family are upstanding, faithful, and well off enough to be sending her a few hundred a week. but that's probably where it started for her - just the mundanity and a bit too much parental complacency from being a certain type of people.

You do realize all of these statistics are going to be skewed from 2020 to 2021 because the vast majority of us were in lockdown?

speaking of stats and such... I looked into this outcomes from single parent households thing.
Now, there is some validity to the claim that the kids will have additional struggles-although not much correlation to firearm deaths (where the subject first came up). I kept reading as to how and why...

Seems that divorce is a more likely predictor than simply being born to a single mother. Apparently it's traumatizing... although we have it on Al's authoritah that trauma is no excuse in life. Whereas if you're born to it, it's at least normal.

Also seems that there's a lower income in single parent households, leading to lower qualities of housing and diet, and obviously far fewer enrichment activities available.

A bunch of other potential indicators as well-like emotional abuses from more fortunate peers, but the conclusion seems to be not so much the absence of a second parent (because the ratio of behavior issues is lower in kids who's parent died rather than divorced), but financial insecurity.

so, anyways... about "willfully" vs "available options"

Childhood Trauma/adult addictions


Substance use, childhood traumatic experience, and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in an urban civilian population

Traumatic life experience, such as physical and sexual abuse as well as neglect, occurs at alarmingly high rates and is considered a major public health problem in the United States.1,2 Early trauma exposure is well known to significantly increase the risk for a number of psychiatric disorders in adulthood, although many who had childhood trauma exposure are quite resilient. The current study is focused on history of childhood traumatic experiences. Ample evidence has shown that childhood trauma compromises neural structure and function, rendering an individual susceptible to later cognitive deficits and psychiatric illnesses, including schizophrenia, major depression, bipolar disorder, Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), and substance abuse.3–8 Particularly, the link between trauma exposure and substance abuse has been well-established. For example, in the National Survey of Adolescents, teens who had experienced physical or sexual abuse/assault were three times more likely to report past or current substance abuse than those without a history of trauma.9 In surveys of adolescents receiving treatment for substance abuse, more than 70% of patients had a history of trauma exposure.10,11

Furthermore, some studies showed that there is a “dose” or “building block” effect of stress load or trauma on the severity of psychopathology, which is not restricted to PTSD.12–14 This collection of studies suggest that a simple dose–response model may not be sufficient on its own to explain PTSD risk, but that PTSD diagnosis is likely once an individual passes a certain stress load threshold regardless of other factors. Weber et al.12 found that stress load in childhood in particular was related to both the number and severity of depressive and PTSD symptoms in patients with these disorders. Thus, trauma load during the stress-sensitive period of childhood may be especially important when considering psychiatric outcomes. The effects of different types of trauma on psychopathology have also been examined,15,16 suggesting the effect of trauma may sometimes be type-specific. For example, Powers et al.15 found that childhood emotional abuse and neglect were more predictive of adult depression than physical or sexual abuse. Gender may also play an important role in behavioral and psychiatric outcomes of different types of childhood trauma. However, the potential differential role of type of childhood maltreatment on substance abuse in a high-risk population remains unclear.

COMORBIDITY OF PTSD AND SUBSTANCE USE DISORDER
Studies have also shown that there is high comorbidity between PTSD with substance abuse disorders3,11,17–20 and other mental disorders. Breslau et al., in particular, found that exposure to traumatic experience did not increase the risk of substance problems independently of PTSD symptomology. Additionally, evidence has shown that the correlation between trauma and substance abuse is particularly strong for adolescents with PTSD. Up to 59% of young people with PTSD subsequently develop substance abuse problems.11,21–23 This seems to be an especially strong relationship in girls.24 Others found that alcohol and drug consumption was associated with greater PTSD symptoms 1 year after a disaster,25 Additionally, women who used drugs were found to have significantly higher mean scores for total PTSD symptom severity and were more likely to meet the criteria for a diagnosis of PTSD compared to nonusers.26

Early traumatic experience may increase risk of substance use disorders (SUDs) because of attempts to self-medicate or to dampen mood symptoms associated with a dysregulated biological stress response. On the other hand, early adolescent onset of substance use or abuse may further disrupt the biological stress response by increasing plasma cortisol levels, thus additionally contributing to risk for PTSD and comorbid depressive symptoms.27 Timing and relative ages of onset are also important when further characterizing this comoribidity between substance abuse and PTSD. Researchers have reported that in cocaine-dependent patients whose PTSD precedes substance abuse, the trauma is most commonly childhood abuse, whereas in those whose substance abuse precedes PTSD onset, the trauma is most commonly associated with the procurement and use of substances.28 Some suggest that the comorbidity of PTSD with substance abuse may represent a shared genetically mediated vulnerability to psychopathology after trauma exposure.24,29

Gender differences in trauma-related risk factors for alcohol and drug abuse have also been reported. One study,30 based on data from adolescent samples, suggests that traumatic event exposure increases risk for SUDs for young women, but not young men. Another study31 also suggests the existence of a gender difference in comorbidity: in men, drug use preceded the exposure to an event, while in women, the onset age for both drug use and exposure to an event were nearly identical.

The current body of literature regarding substance abuse and PTSD has mostly focused on either military or veteran populations or on treatment-seeking substance-dependent individuals. The current study seeks to extend these findings to a civilian medical population, which will include more females, and to patients who are not associated with a treatment-seeking population for substance use. Additionally, trauma exposure assessments in most of the published studies are relatively simple; questionnaires used in the current study—such as the Early Trauma Inventory (ETI) and the Traumatic Events Inventory (TEI)—can provide more extensive information on trauma history. Finally, most studies report substance use, abuse, or dependence as categorical variables, and few have dealt with the severity of SUDs or with the degree of substance exposure. The current study deals with continuous variables of substance exposure that take into account frequency, duration, and amount used during the period of heaviest use.

In the current study, we examined and extended findings showing the links between childhood trauma exposure, substance use, and PTSD. We assessed indications of a dosage effect of trauma, where higher levels of childhood traumatization might lead to both increased substance use and PTSD symptomology. We hypothesize that, like the findings of Breslau et al.19 childhood trauma will not predict substance use independently of PTSD symptoms. However, we do hypothesize that childhood trauma will contribute to increased substance use and PTSD symptoms independently of adult trauma exposure. Finally, we examined evidence of an additive relationship between childhood trauma and substance use problems in predicting the level of PTSD symptomology

I specifically said "domestic violence" in the post, you illiterate doorknob.

You can't do pedantic dickwad nearly as well as Paladin, so stick to the "angry libertarian" niche.

does the Duluth model hold up? Not if you read the whole entry... much like Alpha male theory, it's been questioned by the creator.



Donald Dutton, a psychology professor at the University of British Columbia who has studied abusive personalities, states: "The Duluth Model was developed by people who didn't understand anything about therapy,"[11] and also points out that "lesbian battering is more frequent than heterosexual battering."[19] Philip W. Cook points out that in the case of homosexual domestic violence, the patriarchy is absent: there is no male dominance of women in same-sex relationships, and in fact, female on female abuse is reported more than twice as frequently as male on male abuse.[20] Furthermore, some critics point out that the model ignores the reality that women can be the perpetrators of domestic violence in heterosexual relationships, as well.

Its proponents counter that the Duluth Model is effective and makes best use of scarce resources.[21] However, Ellen Pence herself has written,

"By determining that the need or desire for power was the motivating force behind battering, we created a conceptual framework that, in fact, did not fit the lived experience of many of the men and women we were working with. The DAIP staff [...] remained undaunted by the difference in our theory and the actual experiences of those we were working with [...] It was the cases themselves that created the chink in each of our theoretical suits of armor. Speaking for myself, I found that many of the men I interviewed did not seem to articulate a desire for power over their partner. Although I relentlessly took every opportunity to point out to men in the groups that they were so motivated and merely in denial, the fact that few men ever articulated such a desire went unnoticed by me and many of my coworkers. Eventually, we realized that we were finding what we had already predetermined to find."[

(Thor voice)
Is it though?

Are they a niche anymore?

Angry libertarians have infested Youtube, Youtube comments, Twitter, Reddit, and they ARE 4Chan, so.....what's the word for stereotype times a billion?
I bet the Germans have one.

One thing they never mention about divorce is that unless you have a certain amount of money and a family backing it is worse. Who is likely to have less generational wealth within the family to deal with the costs of divorce? The lawyers and the state take so much, especially if you have to fight over kids, and for child support. My sister and her ex husband both had money of their own and decent incomes, but they both had to go back to their parents for the costs of lawyers. Had they not had marital wealth to immediately pay the state and lawyers either of them could have gone into the rears or collections for court costs and to pay the lawyers. As it was the only reason my sister was able to keep her house was because the family could give her to he money to pay off the ex husband's half.. If my grandparents could not have paid that then they house would have been sold to split the costs, and it would have been sold without regard for lost value due to the housing collapse.

Marriage may be a way to protect the family in case of disaster but divorce for poor people destroys family wealth and opportunity unless you were really opper middle class with hundreds of thousands sitting around in your parent's savings to make the immediate payments.

Then there is the horrors of what happens to biological father who do not have health insurance because of the birth of a child. They get hit for half the birthing costs by the state. that could be 15-20k in a shit hospital. You are immediately in the rears for if she asks the state to collect any child support. That is if she has insurance to pay for the birth because her insurance does not pay your half if you are not married. What single guy can just fork over half of 30-40k for a birth because he got a woman pregnant? She might be on medicaid and state support and he is going to owe that money if she names him. If she does not name him then she cannot get the state to help her get a dime. So she has to name him. All this time the state is taking fees and cuts of all of these payments. They do not take a defined percentage, but when you consider the income of poor families they are taking a huge percent when they collect court fees and costs.

This is the main reason why the states do not want abortion. They make huge money off the lifetime of all the poor children who have to go through the system for child care collections and divorce proceedings. With the huge rate of divorce and the fact they have made it so even amiable divorces have to go through custody hearings there is huge money guaranteed to be paid to every state every time a child is born. Most parents are going to divorce, and that stat is not going down. There is an industry of custody courts across every town in america. You also fund lawyers to be in family court. If people had more abortions you would hit that industry directly.

This is why abortion is protected by the right wing and the left, and it has nothing to do with saving the babies.

No, you said domestic abuse, which can cover a lot more than actual violence, depending on who you ask.

first off, try to keep your misrepresentations consistent within the same quote tree

second, in the VERY NEXT SENTENCE she was specific about the nature of the abuse being the result of violent outbursts.

and if as you seem to suggest, only violence qualifies as abusive, why wouldn't you have presumed it was a factor? y'know... one and one and one is three...

Arselochbefall.

I think Shirogayne was talking about niches within WF, as opposed to niche positions generally.

I dunno... one of the reasons I even bother with UA (other than the yamz) is because I encounter more than a few glue sniffers with similar arguments.

Ah, so you DID understand what I was saying, and you were both just being pedantic asshats.

Now, why wouldn't I assume physical violence? Because some people want to see "saying things I don't like" treated the same as beating your ass. Many of whom being spouses looking to cast themselves as victims for favorable treatment in divorce court.

If it makes you feel any better, my mom was thrown against a hot heater by the bastard once. Does that count?

Oh yeah, and also burned my brother's face with a lightbulb as a baby, and the doctors were absolutely stunned that he didn't have any major facial deformity from it.

Me, I only just got mental abuse for being yelled at every time I had an outburst of emotion in school because I was probably somewhere on the autism spectrum and my folks were worried about the school labelling me a problem child because I was black so.....guess it doesn't count in AlbertWorld ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

and once again, the I know you are but what am I gambit...
good question though, why wouldn't you presume the violence? but instead you throw in a tin full of red herring conditions like "abuse can cover a lot more".
Then you throw in your usual BS that it's the only real violence is physical and your intent is clear (at least until you dance behind the aprons of "I didn't say that EXACTLY! can't prove it! nuh-uh!".

There you go. Police are negligent if this was promptly reported and ignored.

No, sorry. Plenty of children get yelled at. I was yelled at. It wasn't abuse.

I would not presume violence because plenty of people cry abuse for nonviolent acts. I think I've been clear on that. Work on your goddamned reading comprehension and stop asking me to repeat myself.