.
Feedback

Grothman's Bill Links Nonmarital Parenthood with Child Abuse

State Sen. Glenn Grothman has proposed a bill that would require the Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention Board to consider single parenthood a contributing factor to child abuse.

State Sen. Glenn Grothman has proposed a bill that considers nonmarital parenthood a contributing factor to child abuse.

Grothman presented the bill to the Senate Committee on Public Health, Human Services and Revenue public hearing last week, according to the Huffington Post.

Senate Bill 507 states it is "an act to amend ...  statutes ... relating to: requiring the Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention Board to emphasize nonmarital parenthood as a contributing factor to child abuse and neglect."

Grothman was unavailable for comment Monday afternoon but you can read more about his stance in a newsletter he published regarding his belief that the breakdown of the family is America's biggest problem.

The announcement of the bill has turned a lot of heads.

"Wisconsin State Senator Glenn Grothman, the Assistant Majority Leader and a close ally of GOP Governor Scott Walker in the effort to destroy collective bargaining in the Badger State, is taking crazy to new levels," Forbes contributor Rick Unbar wrote.

A post on The New Civil Rights Movement web site also considers the bill an attack on gay couples who are raising children together.

Commentor Nikesha on TheRoot.com suggests that the bill is merely a political distraction from other important social issues. 

A Rhode Island resident started a petition on Change.org: "Withdraw Senate Bill 507 and end the war on women."

In 2009 there were approximately 13.5 million single parents in the U.S., with single mothers outnumbering single fathers five to one according to U.S. Census Data posted on TheBostonChannel.com. Single-parent households make up a third of households in Wisconsin.

An American Community Survey 5-year estimate of Port Washington from the U.S. Census Bureau said that 47 single mothers in Port Washington gave birth to children in the past 12 months (margin of error: +/- 51), while another 80 births were reported by married couples (margin of error: +/- 39).

Grothman was not available for comment Monday afternoon.

C Schmidt March 6, 2012 at 07:49 pm
I have been following comments on this all day, and Sen. Grotham is starting to sound like our very own version of Rush Limbaugh. Now Limbaugh made the mistake of singling out one woman and calling her a slut the other day. Our Sen. Grotham lumps all single woman/men together as irresponsible parents? What is the true difference here? None. Both men are off in their own spheres.
Tom Kamenick March 6, 2012 at 09:41 pm
I'm still seeing a lot of confusion and would encourage people to go read the bill, it's very short.
It does not have anything to do with factors a court can consider when looking to remove a child from a home (TPR proceedings), charge someone with child abuse, or even make custody determinations or anything else involving "the best interest of the child." All it does is require the government agency to include in its literature that single parenthood is ONE contributing factor to child abuse. Is that true? I don't know. I hope Grothman wouldn't call for that unless he had something to back it up, and I've contacted him with that exact question. Those of you who are going off the handle and attributing all sorts of evils to Grothman, you need to look and see what he is actually doing, please. He is not lumping all single women together, he is not claiming all single parent families will result in abuse, and he is not trying to harm children.
Tom Kamenick March 6, 2012 at 10:00 pm
Ask and ye shall receive - I received a quick reply from the Senator's office.
Congressional report on child abuse: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/opre/abuse_neglect/natl_incid/reports/natl_incid/nis4_report_congress_full_pdf_jan2010.pdf From Section 5.3 of the report - Children in homes with parent + unmarried partner are over 8 times likelier to suffer abuse than children in homes with two married parents. The incidence was 3-4 times higher in other situations, like one parent no partner, and two unmarried parents.
Lyle Ruble March 6, 2012 at 10:37 pm
@Tom Kamenick....Let me attempt to add some clarification to some statements you made. First and foremost this is a change in the distributed information from the abuse board. However, I being a trained social scientist, the incidence of child abuse is subject to many variables. To claim that single parent households are the primary independent variable is more than just a little disingenuous. There is a much clearer relationship between the incidences of poverty being the independent variable. There isn't enough hard evidence to support the single parent variable in the distributed literature. Therefore, it is best to leave it out.
Also, to "detain a child" is not the same as TPR. TPR is only done once it has been determined that it's in the best interest of the child/children that they are not returned to the family of origin. Anyone who has followed Senator Grothman understands that he has his own social agenda. He must be watched closely for what his true intent is and what should be unfolding from his said agenda.
Greg Huegerich March 6, 2012 at 10:51 pm
Did Grothman manage to work the word Abomination into any of this?
Patrick Modjeski March 6, 2012 at 11:25 pm
I called his office and asked for an explaination of the bill. I would say that there is big slant on the article that doesn't discuss the statastics that the legislation is based. He is not against single parents... http://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/usermanuals/foundation/foundatione.cfm
Tom Kamenick March 6, 2012 at 11:37 pm
Lyle,
I appreciate your insights, but I don't see much behind them. First, the legislation doesn't address either detaining or TPR's, so that's irrelevant. Second, the legislation does not require single parent households to be described as the primary independent variable, only that it be emphasized as A (as in one) factor. Finally, you talk about literature but don't cite to anything. The study the Senator shared with me finds an extremely strong link between single parenthood and abuse. Yes, there are many variables at work here, but this is quite clearly a prominent one. "An analysis of child abuse cases in a nationally representative sample of 42 counties found that children from single parent families are more likely to be victims of physical and sexual abuse than children who live with both biological parents. Compared to their peers living with both parents, children in single parent homes had: 77 percent greater risk of being physically abused 87 percent greater risk of being harmed by physical neglect 165 percent greater risk of experiencing notable physical neglect 74 percent greater risk of suffering from emotional neglect 80 percent greater risk of suffering serious injury as a result of abuse 120 percent greater risk of experiencing some type of maltreatment overall."
Tom Kamenick March 6, 2012 at 11:38 pm
Btw, I can never figure out how to get these in the right order. There's no "reply" button in Lyle's post...
Anyway, why are you against including information in government handouts pointing out these kinds of risks? None of this should be controversial. If you want your kids to be safer, get in a committed, stable, married relationship instead of shacking up with the next guy or gal who catches your fancy.
Lyle Ruble March 7, 2012 at 12:36 am
@Tom Kamenick....I'm sorry that I didn't include the citations concerning abuse and poverty, frankly I didn't because I didn't take the time to drag them out. To expedite matters go ahead and Google poverty and abuse. In any case, I admit that ideally a two parent loving family is best. However, ideals rarely manifested in reality.
I brought up TPR because of your use, which I agree has nothing to do with the Abuse Board's dissemination of information. I have been involved with the issue of child abuse and neglect for decades, first as a psychotherapist and later as a Board Member and President of Jewish Family Services in another state. My spouse is a state licensed social worker, working for the state in Child Protection Services. The statistics that were provided to you represents a correlation and not a causal relationship. In my first comment I stated that it is a highly complex subject. I feel very strongly that including such information about single parents and abuse is highly misleading. We could just as easily make the correlation between those who believe and use corporal punishment, since they also have a high rate of child abuse. I can't overstate my distrust of Senator Grothman's agenda. On WPR he admitted that he was not getting the other Abuse Board Members to go along with his wishes and now he is using his position as a elected senator to end run the board he sits on.
Liz March 7, 2012 at 02:56 am
Please do not group all single mom's into the same category.
A. Some do not receive money from the government. They are hard working tax paying citizens. B. Some do not invite men that they don't know (well) and trust into their homes. C. Some have adopted children. D. Some will do anything for their children. I am ashamed to say I have voted for this man. By the way I am a Republican. Please don't tell me not to take this personally. How can I not?????
Tom Kamenick March 7, 2012 at 11:42 am
Maybe because he's not grouping all single moms into the same category?
Tom Kamenick March 7, 2012 at 11:45 am
Lyle, you are right that this is a correlative relationship. But the problem is that so are all the other links between child abuse and other variables - poverty, stress, whether the parent was abused as a child, etc.
There will never be an experiment that establishes any one of those things as causative with any scientific certainty, because you could not ethically create and carry out such an experiment. So I have no problem working with that data.
Liz March 7, 2012 at 12:15 pm
Yes, he is Tom. Senate Bill 507 - Section 1. " In Promoting those campaigns and materials the board shall emphasize non marital parent hood as a contributing factor to child abuse and neglect."
It is all in the same category.
Tom Kamenick March 7, 2012 at 01:21 pm
Fine - to the extent that the children of single parents are statistically 3-8 times as likely to be abused as children of married parents, and the extent that Grothman is calling attention to a serious risk associated with that category of people (people whose children are significantly more likely to be abused), I guess he is grouping them in one category.
But criticizing that is about as intelligent as criticizing your doctor for telling you you have a higher risk of heart disease because of your age, gender, race, family history, etc. That's the exact same kind of "grouping" going on here - he's not making some kind of inappropriate grouping like claiming all single moms abuse their children, or invite risky men to live with them.
Jaime Sommers March 7, 2012 at 01:45 pm
As some history, Grothman advocates other discriminatory positions. He strongly advocated controlling classroom health discussions and advocates teaching abstinence only, which is what PWSSD does. There is bias against sexually active teens, who will produce these single parent homes, or kids living with grandparents, but he doesn't support the birth control that would prevent it. He also thinks that homosexuality is an abomination, and therefore gay kids who get bullied deserve it. Regardless of belief re virginity or gayness, a student, whether perfect in your mind or gay or sexually active, deserves our support, protection and proper appropriate education for birth control as a minor child in our society. Is it appropriate to allow a gay kid to get bullied because he or she is gay? A gay or sexually active student is a CHILD. If they find out they are not gay later on, they have tons of abuse now to content with in the form of PTSD which the state may need to support. This and other views he spews are inappropriate for a reasonable rational lawmaking position and for a healthy Wisconsin. His individual bills and global language doesn't all tie in to support this bill or reason. If single parenthood is a concern of abuse, then we need to be giving students birth control education, abstinence included but not the primary form, since, when you look at it logically and statistically, it will not work. I am trying to find historical speeches of Grothman's but Google is all 507.
Lyle Ruble March 7, 2012 at 02:07 pm
@Tom Kamenick...Most people don't understand the difference in causality and correlation. If you look only to correlation you can draw just about any conclusion you want. Conditions of chronic poverty result in increased risks of a number of social problems, including but limited to; increased substance abuse, poor diets, learning impairments and poor school performance, participation in the underground economy, higher incidence of child abuse and neglect, and destabilized family structures. Why isn't Senator Grothman pushing poverty as the primary correlation?
Many years ago I was a licensed psychotherapist. My practice involved many cases of child abuse and neglect as well as adolescent and family counseling. As a practicing therapist I gained a firm grasp of the issues and conditions that contributed to such family dysfunction and subsequent abuse. Conditions vary depending on the circumstances and many variables, but the highest variable was the financial situation. Even if the family began as a married committed couple, nearly 50% ends in divorce. In the majority of those families, children are present. After separation and divorce, finances become a major issue. Women and children are particularly vulnerable and bear the brunt of the economic devastation with many living in a state of poverty. (continued)
Lyle Ruble March 7, 2012 at 02:10 pm
@Tom Kamenick...(continued) To give inordinate attention to single parenthood as a primary causality is simply not in the best interest of preventing child abuse and neglect. Single parent families already suffer enough hardship without drawing unwarranted public attention to the probability of child abuse. Obviously, caring intact two parent families are the ideal, but the ideal doesn’t very well reflect reality.
Senator Grothman is only one board member of the Wisconsin Children’s Trust Fund and he has been unable to get the board to go along with his proposed inclusion. As he admitted on WPR he is using his unique position as a State Senator to do an end run around the will of the board. This is, in my estimation, an abuse of his position. All information provided by the CTF should be factual and presented in such a manner as to provide realistic probabilities for access to communities. I also understand your support of Senator Grothman because of your connection to WILL. Therefore, I have to question your true agenda.
Tom Kamenick March 7, 2012 at 02:20 pm
Honestly, I have no clue why you think my employment at WILL is at all relevant to this discussion. I can assure you this issue is far outside WILL's mission.
Regarding the rest of your comment, my point here is not that this "has" to be done, but that there is reasonable support for the position that Grothman is taking, and even though intelligent people might disagree about where the primary focus should be, he's not some monster or troglodyte for proposing this.
Lyle Ruble March 7, 2012 at 03:45 pm
@Tom Kamenick...I brought WILL into the discussion because of the organization's exclusive defense of the political right's interests. Which, by inference would make you a defender of Senator Grothman, who by all measures is a politically hard right individual committed to right wing social engineering. He has consistently labeled those in society that he doesn't agree with their lifestyles or social standing as being lesser citizens. This proposed legislation is just another attempt for him to continue his campaign against certain forms of family structure.
With your defense of him, it is highly probable that you support his social engineering views, which I disagree with completely. As in the case of child abuse and neglect, I am only interested in the prevention of abuse and neglect and not the unrealistic pejorative statements against single parenthood.
Tom Kamenick March 7, 2012 at 03:56 pm
While WILL is certainly an organization focusing on conservative government and fiscal ideals (typically not conservative social issues such as this), we are nonpartisan and nowhere near "exclusively" on the side of the political right. Bad governance is bad governance, and we're happy to represent the interests of individuals and businesses suffering under Democrats or Republicans.
Don Niederfrank March 7, 2012 at 10:50 pm
Wow.
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/wisconsin-senator-who-introduced-anti-single-parent-bill-says-women-trained-lie-about-planne If you read his newsletter linked above, I think it is pretty clear that what Grothman is saying is that government programs encourage women to choose a lifestyle that increases the possibility of abuse for their children. His solution is to somehow tell them of this and...what? They are then going to make a different decision? That's either naive or duplicitous, the latter if this is all a cover to justify the reduction of social programs for single parents.
$$andSense March 8, 2012 at 12:06 am
So Grothman is making a statement that has to be law by inference? Give me a break. This is all the guy has time to do with tax dollars? Done with beating up the union kids on the playground for their lunch money and now move on to this? Check his bio in the blue book. No mention of marital status or having children. May as well as had a cloistered monk or nun write this who has just as much a clue. Maybe we should write law about how tobacco and obesity is linked to cardiac arrest and resultant insurance rates. But, if you have to defend him regardless because he represents the political party of your choice, knock yourselves out. I have dealt with the man face to face on a number of issues (and no, none of your stupid union issues but more important stuff like property rights) and I think he is a certified goof. With his white shoes he reminds me of Eddy of Lampoon’s vacation movie.
Jon B Citizen March 10, 2012 at 10:44 pm
More lie an OBAMANATION!
Jon B Citizen March 10, 2012 at 10:54 pm
It amazes me of the double standard so we should pay for birth control but not educate people on the difficulties of being a single parent. We are all for the teachers and state workers, but against private sector mining jobs because it will hurt the environment. We are the 99% the 1% should pay more. This world is a disgrace it stems from the tree huger, nobody wins nobody loses, we don't keep score, we can not give a child a spanking we put them on timeout. Everybody makes the team. Kids need to learn early in life that there are disappointments in life we coddle our kids to the point they are spoiled little brats who recall people because that person did not get there way. The more I see going on in this world the more I do believe that the Myans are right and this world will end in Dec.
Lyle Ruble March 10, 2012 at 11:39 pm
@Jon B Citizen...Are you even aware of the inferences you are making. Thank G-d that child rearing has changed and people are now attempting to deal with their children more humanely. I don't disagree that there are times when things get carried away with the lack of competitiveness. But with youngsters below a certain age, competition is counterproductive. How can you connect the recall to coddling kids, amazing to say the least. The Mayan calendar is all that ends on December 21, 2012.
Kathy March 10, 2012 at 11:55 pm
Legislation like this is just more proof that politicians have no clue what is really going on. Statistics shma-tistics! This is another politician barking for some ambiguous language to be added to some print material, the motivation coming from a bunch of data? To me not much different then a weatherman broadcasting a cloudy gloomy day from his basement, it's sunny from my kitchen window - not a cloud in sight.
Instead of pointing a finger at a presumed flawed situation, why not do more to empower non marital households, single parent households are not going to go away and I doubt some words will impact the statistics. Any household with children has it challenges, I'd reckon finances are the biggest issue and more troubling for the single parent. The current system of assistance encourages dependence on the assistance. In 1990, I explored getting a little help. I was working 3 jobs, paying full rent, daycare and insurance. I made too much money and was told If I left a job I'd qualify for gobs of assistance. I was penalized for working. I kept my 3 jobs and lived in a rat hole for 8 years with my son.We survived, ONLY because I had a strong work ethic and desire to make it on my own despite many doubting. Perhaps to generalized of a comment, but...I was in those trenches! My single neighbor? She's on child 5, lives in a much nicer place then I, gets her nails done weekly , nice car, vacations and has NEVER worked a day in her life. I've not had a vacation in 20yrs.
dpatric2 March 11, 2012 at 01:13 am
The national Republican Party has Rush Limbaugh for their spokesman...the Wisconsin Republican Party has their own "little Rush"...Senator Grothman!!!
Tom Kamenick March 26, 2012 at 03:22 pm
http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2012/mar/25/glenn-grothman/gop-wisconsin-state-senator-says-study-shows-kids-/
Politifact rates the claims behind this bill as True.
Greg Huegerich March 26, 2012 at 03:51 pm
Its a concept known as legislating propaganda, forcing a particular spin or slant on issues (whether it be true, false, or "it depends on your beliefs" or "it depends on the study"). This is counterproductive to good government, in that the various "expert" departments should be capable of updating their literature with appropriate facts and information without legislators needing to add their own spin and twist. The same concept applies to birth control and sex ed, these turn into contentious legislative debates on too regular a basis.
If this kind of overly controlling legislation continues to get passed, it only creates more red tape that gets cut through every time political parties change-over control in madison. I like to envision this as "Droopy at the elevator control" from the old cartoons. When the left takes power, everyone gets slammed into the ceiling, when the right takes power, we all get slammed on the floor. What the world really needs is common sense policies that cover middle of the road scenarios, as opposed to constant extremism and social control.
Tom Kamenick March 26, 2012 at 03:54 pm
Greg, you win the prize for the best political analogy! Great image. "Going left, sir." WHAM. "Going right, sir." WHAM.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Port Washington-Saukville Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Collin Richter, Waukesha North Badger Boys State Representative
BRM Management June 10, 2013 at 05:11 pm
Update! Collin was just selected as one of two STATE TROOPERS for Dodge County. He and otherRead More representatives were interviewed yesterday. Word is that he may be assisting Governor Scott Walker off the helicopter when he arrives at Badger Boys State later this week. Governor Walker is a past Badger Boys State representative.
Tourquise & silver from AZ
priscilla June 11, 2013 at 05:28 pm
I LOVE the squash blossom necklace.
je.081796 June 13, 2013 at 09:03 am
Kate or priscilla, Give me a call if really interested in the jewelry, 414-426-6268, on ebay theyRead More are very high, My brother paid $900 long ago, and passed away 2 years ago. For that price I would sell both or name what you think they might be worth.
Kate Schwid June 13, 2013 at 09:12 am
Might want to check out e-collectique in Theinsville
Cheryl M Levy-Meunier June 7, 2013 at 11:02 am
I have been trying to upload a picture, but it won't let me :(
Sarah Worthman (Editor) June 7, 2013 at 03:22 pm
Oh no! What happens? If you don't mind, email me directly and let's see if we can fix this up forRead More you! sarah.worthman@patch.com