Stephanie Dallam: Difference between revisions
(can't hate on Reisman enough) |
m (can't hate on Reisman enough) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Stephanie Dallam R.N., M.S.N. ([http://images.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1316/1410106376_8755e6eb7e.jpg%3Fv%3D0&imgrefurl=http://www.flickr.com/photos/angelashelton/1410106376/&h=375&w=500&sz=110&hl=en&start=1&sig2=okMzazTlrPjAQUZvMoWWkA&um=1&tbnid=SJfP_c-GDfRECM:&tbnh=98&tbnw=130&ei=tIgwSOSPMI3C0QSQuPDKAQ&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dstephanie%2Bdallam%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26sa%3DN picture]) is a child-protection zealot who attempts to foist herself off as a clinical author on child trauma. The end result of most of her writings can be said to represent a shade of pseudoscience falling somewhere in between that of [[David Finkelhor]] and [[Judith Reisman]] | Stephanie Dallam R.N., M.S.N. ([http://images.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1316/1410106376_8755e6eb7e.jpg%3Fv%3D0&imgrefurl=http://www.flickr.com/photos/angelashelton/1410106376/&h=375&w=500&sz=110&hl=en&start=1&sig2=okMzazTlrPjAQUZvMoWWkA&um=1&tbnid=SJfP_c-GDfRECM:&tbnh=98&tbnw=130&ei=tIgwSOSPMI3C0QSQuPDKAQ&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dstephanie%2Bdallam%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26sa%3DN picture]) is a child-protection zealot who attempts to foist herself off as a clinical author on child trauma. The end result of most of her writings can be said to represent a shade of pseudoscience falling somewhere in between that of [[David Finkelhor]] and [[Judith Reisman]] - a sex-fascist homophobe and pedophile-obsessed revisionist of [[Alfred Kinsey]]. | ||
Dallam, who is allied to a pseudomedical, 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".[http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=7&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.leadershipcouncil.org%2Fdocs%2FNova%2520Conference%2520brochure.pdf&ei=k4MwSNaJOpreQbjWof0C&usg=AFQjCNHL1CjiwrrByfNWG6xbrUJwUHnenw&sig2=PzWMhyD1_kb0g5o7Bc1yVA] | Dallam, who is allied to a pseudomedical, 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".[http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=7&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.leadershipcouncil.org%2Fdocs%2FNova%2520Conference%2520brochure.pdf&ei=k4MwSNaJOpreQbjWof0C&usg=AFQjCNHL1CjiwrrByfNWG6xbrUJwUHnenw&sig2=PzWMhyD1_kb0g5o7Bc1yVA] | ||
Revision as of 07:07, 19 May 2008
Stephanie Dallam R.N., M.S.N. (picture) is a child-protection zealot who attempts to foist herself off as a clinical author on child trauma. The end result of most of her writings can be said to represent a shade of pseudoscience falling somewhere in between that of David Finkelhor and Judith Reisman - a sex-fascist homophobe and pedophile-obsessed revisionist of Alfred Kinsey.
Dallam, who is allied to a pseudomedical, 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]
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.