Yesterday newspapers reported the release of another paper from the ongoing Dunedin Multi-disciplinary Health and Development Study. It found that child maltreatment was linked to heart disaese in later life due to the body's inflammatory reaction to stress. Here is one response from the Public Health Association, who spin it as another reason to ban smacking;
"Gay Keating of the Public Health Association says the report is a wake-up call for families, politicians, health services and society in general. She says it highlights the impact hitting children as a form of discipline can have. Ms Keating says the law regarding smacking needs to be changed and parents must learn how to exercise discipline without causing damage."
Of course one couldn't expect Gay Keating to put out the following;
"A new report shows that the link between maltreatment and heart disease is not caused by growing up in poorer families or with less healthy lifestyles therefore the policies we have been promoting, increasing benefit levels for example, are not the answer after all."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Disregarding the smacking issue, why should Keating (or anyone) believe that "the link between maltreatment and heart disease is not caused by growing up in poorer families..."?
I have not read the paper (have you?) but generally research shows a positive correlation between child maltreatment and poverty, thus we would expect that growing up in poorer families is also positively correlated with heart disease, wouldn't we?
Of course, a positive correlation by itself is not enough to deduce a causal relationship, but certainly one would be very foolish to conclude from the evidence that "the link between maltreatment and heart disease is NOT CAUSED by growing up in poorer families..."
Post a Comment