60 ms·
http://www.martindaly.ca/uploads/2/3/7/0/23707972/cinderella_effect_2008.pdf http://www.martindaly.ca/uploads/2/3/7/0/23707972/cinderella... >The most thorough
by scythe 8y ago
http://www.martindaly.ca/uploads/2/3/7/0/23707972/cinderella_effect_2008.pdf http://www.martindaly.ca/uploads/2/3/7/0/23707972/cinderella...
>The most thorough analyses are from Canada, where data in a national archive of all homicides known to police indicate
that children under 5 years of age were beaten to death by their putative genetic fathers at a rate of 2.6 deaths per million child-years at risk (residing with their fathers),
while the corresponding rate for stepfathers was over 120 times higher at 321.6 (Daly&Wilson, 2001).
That is a very large odds ratio.
- BurningFrog 8y agoYou know, that does make me think about my step dad a bit differently...
- MRD85 8y agoI wouldn't attribute this entirely to "my kid vs not my kid". I live in a western country and it's typically lower socio-economic groups that split and recouple with really young kids (i.e <5). The most at-risk groups for violence in these early years tend to also have uncoupled parents who are constantly seeing new men. If you split these statistics through 10th percentile socioeconomic groups I'm sure it wouldn't be as significant as 120 times. This paper is 10 years old and references Sweden as having less than a 10x increase.
- iguy 8y ago> 2.6 deaths per million child-years at risk Thinking aloud: that's about 1/7 of Canada's murder rate, and if I guess that under-5 children are 7% of population, such things would make up 1% of all murders, which does not sound crazy to me. If step-dads are 100x more dangerous, and 10% of kids have one (just a guess) then step-kid murders would be 10% of all murders. That sounds high but perhaps not crazy? 321.6 / million is about 20x the whole country's murder rate.