Alice Miller, child abuse and mistreatment

APRIL 2010

MARCH 2010

FEBRUARY 2010

JANUARY 2010

DECEMBER 2009

NOVEMBER 2009

OCTOBER 2009

SEPTEMBER 2009

AUGUST 2009

JULY 2009

JUNE 2009

MAY 2009

APRIL 2009

MARCH 2009

FEBRUARY 2009

JANUARY 2009

DECEMBER 2008

NOVEMBER 2008

OCTOBER 2008

SEPTEMBER 2008

AUGUST 2008

JULY 2008

JUNE 2008

MAY 2008

APRIL 2008

MARCH 2008

FEBRUARY 2008

JANUARY 2008

DECEMBER 2007

NOVEMBER 2007

OCTOBER 2007

SEPTEMBER 2007

AUGUST 2007

JULY 2007

JUNE 2007

MAY 2007

APRIL 2007

MARCH 2007

FEBRUARY 2007

JANUARY 2007

DECEMBER 2006

NOVEMBER 2006

OCTOBER 2006

SEPTEMBER 2006

AUGUST 2006

JULY 2006

JUNE 2006

MAY 2006

APRIL 2006

MARCH 2006

FEBRUARY 2006

JANUARY 2006

DECEMBER 2005

NOVEMBER 2005

OCTOBER 2005

SEPTEMBER 2005

AUGUST 2005

JULY 2005

protecting parents
Tuesday October 21, 2008

I went on holiday, but the question “How do I explain myself the increasing ignorance about the effects of making a child suffer, in spite of so many scientific discoveries about the brains of maltreated children?” has been active in my brain. And depending on the perspective of the answer, many causes come about. Here are some:

- The sixties and seventies were times of rebeliσn against authority, including parental authority. It was becoming increasingly clear that the family was a form of dictatorship. Vietnam helped the outrage.

- Feminism was showing its horns, about male authority, The terrible mistake of feminism, within which I worked in London was never analysing the effects of mother abuse on infants, since the aim seemed to be to make all women innocent victims of male abuse, including governments. They sanctified women more that the catholic church. If a woman commited a crime it was some men,s fault.

This prevented any studies continuing about the effects of abuse of power from women on their offsprings. Children are the ones that support all the effects of the emotionally blind people that have contact with them. Feminists with emotional blindness became leaders.

- The status quo within Social sciences started being terrified by the fact that there were more and more people free of emotional blindness working within. The Works of R.D.Land, Spitz about children in homes with no affection but everything else syndrome, Cooper and others. Then a kind of coup started to take place within psychophisiology and social sciences. I recall in London the Society of relatives of schizophrenics becoming the campaign to STOP BLAMING PARENTS within therapeutic circles (one cannot call them schools). The reaction of emotionaly blind adults started to be felt i n every level of society, and the sentence “It is better to leave tose things behind” became the norm. The study of the brain centered on stupid things. The campaing to erradicate a leadership that was going to rebel to the satus quo became systematic until today.



These were some of the ideas that came to me, but I think this question you made deserves a conference. Afectionately. P. from Spain.



AM: I totally agree with you. In addition to all the reasons you mentioned I think that the foundation of False Memory Syndrom had a big influence on the increasing general denial of child abuse since 1970 when Laing, Sass and many others were writing. This foundation have suit therapists who helped former victims to retrieve old memories of sexual abuse. The creators of the foundation had succeeded to spread the fear of being suit among the therapists who are now less interested in childhood and more in spirituality and other blinders like this. Thank you for your mentioning the association of parents of schizophrenics, this goes in the same direction: with much money you can silence the most obvious truth.

Top