One of our staff members is contributing considerably to a News Archiving service at Mu. Any well educated (Masters, PhD or above) users who wish to make comments on news sites, please contact Jim Burton directly rather than using this list, and we can work on maximising view count.
Stephanie Dallam: Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
She is probably best known as the author of a 2002 [http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/res/dallam/5.html paper] that attempted to frame the work of [[Rind et al]] (also see [[Research]]) as advocacy propaganda. What - apart from the numerous misrepresentations - is most surprising about this paper, is that the author felt that she could base a large portion of her critique around what appeared to be a guilt-by-association argument, and then accuse the other of abusing protocols of science for the purpose of non-existent advocacy. | She is probably best known as the author of a 2002 [http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/res/dallam/5.html paper] that attempted to frame the work of [[Rind et al]] (also see [[Research]]) as advocacy propaganda. What - apart from the numerous misrepresentations - is most surprising about this paper, is that the author felt that she could base a large portion of her critique around what appeared to be a guilt-by-association argument, and then accuse the other of abusing protocols of science for the purpose of non-existent advocacy. | ||
[[Category:Official Encyclopedia]][[Category:People]][[Category:People: Unsympathetic Activists]][[Category:Victims' Rights]] | [[Category:Official Encyclopedia]][[Category:People]][[Category:People: Unsympathetic Activists]][[Category:Victims' Rights]][[Category:People: Academics]][[Category:People: Pseudoscientists]][[Category:Research]][[Research: Victimology and other Pseudoscience]][[Category:People: American]] | ||
[[Category:People: Academics]][[Category:People: Pseudoscientists]][[Research: Victimology and other Pseudoscience]][[Category:People: American]] | |||
Revision as of 01:45, 4 November 2008
Stephanie Dallam R.N., M.S.N. is a child-protection advocate who uses science to advance her child trauma agenda. Most of Dallam's writings can be dismissed as pseudoscience somewhere in-between the mainstream appeal of David Finkelhor and the extremity Judith Reisman - a known homophobe and revisionist of Alfred Kinsey.
Dallam, who is allied to a victimology-oriented advocacy group known as The Leadership Council, is also said to have worked as "family nurse, practitioner [and] in pediatric intensive care for ten years at the University of Missouri Hospital and Clinics [and as a] nursing instructor at the University of Missouri—Columbia. She has written numerous articles on issues related to the welfare of children".[1]
From the following quote, it becomes apparent that Dallam believes she is engaged in an anti-pedophile science war:
- ""What the pedophiles are looking for is some group of professionals to champion their cause," said Stephanie Dallam, a Leadership Council researcher. "Then they'll come up with a derogatory term to deride anyone who disagrees with them. Their claim will be to objective science, even though their science is sloppy and terrible.""[2]
Rind "Debunking"
She is probably best known as the author of a 2002 paper that attempted to frame the work of Rind et al (also see Research) as advocacy propaganda. What - apart from the numerous misrepresentations - is most surprising about this paper, is that the author felt that she could base a large portion of her critique around what appeared to be a guilt-by-association argument, and then accuse the other of abusing protocols of science for the purpose of non-existent advocacy.Research: Victimology and other Pseudoscience