Within the hearts & minds of dedicated professional women everywhere!
About
WOW (Women Online/Offline) Network is a business building resource developed for women professionals. Join our powerful alliance of remarkable women! Visit us online at... http://wownetworkalliance.com/
Company Overview
The WOW Network Alliance is an on and offline resource for women professionals who want to grow within their career or business. What we do is provide access to the latest and most relevant education, support & networking opportunities.
As a member based resource for women entrepreneurs, career professionals, and those within the direct sales industry our pages are filled with essential tools & resources provided by our members for our members.
The key difference with our network is that we are positioned to provide personal and professional development plus valuable networking events both online and offline.
Take the time to participate and become involved as we connect women all over the world!
You can find us online at www.wownetworkalliance.com. (read less)
The WOW Network Alliance is an on and offline resource for women professionals who want to grow within their career or business. What we do is provide access to the latest and most relevant education, support & networking opportunities.
As a member based resource for women entrepreneurs, career professionals, and those within the direct sales industry our pages are filled with essential tools & resources provided by our members for our members.
The key difference with our network is that we... (read more)
Description
There are three things that you should spend you time doing: Marketing, marketing, marketing. It is the most important thing that someone growing a business should be doing. If you are not prepared to do that, then everything else is irrelevant ~Emma Harrison
Mission
To provide personal & professional tools and resources that excite & enlighten women everywhere.
We had a tremendous surprise today on the WOW Online Meet & Greet with one of our guests, Delaproser, who is an advocate for the voiceless, the powerless and the weak, particularly in North America.
This struck us because it is not too often when we run across someone who has dedicated their life & efforts to help those who are unable to speak for themselves.
Thank you, Delaproser for all you do. Your dedication is a testimony to the heart that beats within you. You are an inspiration because you have chosen to use your pain to heal and shelter others.
The WOW Network is dedicated to educate, bring awareness and enlighten not only our members but the world, so with that said, it'is our pleasure to share what we discovered through our contact with Delaproser today. Learn more about Delaproser by visiting...
According to the (American) National Committee to Prevent Child Abuse, in 1997 neglect represented 54% of confirmed cases of child abuse, physical abuse 22%, sexual abuse 8%, emotional maltreatment 4%, and other forms of maltreatment 12%.[27]
A UNICEF report on child wellbeing[28] stated that the United States and the United Kingdom ranked lowest among industrial nations with respect to the wellbeing of children. It also found that child neglect and child abuse were far more common in single-parent families than in families where both parents are present.
In the USA, neglect is defined as the failure to meet the basic needs of children including housing, clothing, food and access to medical care. Researchers found over 91,000 cases of neglect in one year (from October 2005 to 30 September 2006) using information from a database of cases verified by protective services agencies.[2]
Neglect could also take the form of financial abuse by not buying the child adequate materials for survival.[29]
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services reports that for each year between 2000 and 2005, "female parents acting alone" were most likely to be perpetrators of child abuse. A child abuse fatality is when a child's death is the result of abuse or neglect, or when abuse and/or neglect are contributing factors to a child's death. In the United States, 1,730 children died in 2008 due to factors related to abuse; this is a rate of 2.33 per 100,000 U.S. children.[31] Child abuse fatalities are widely recognized as being under-counted; it is estimated that between 60-85% of child fatalities due to maltreatment are not recorded as such on death certificates. Younger children are at a much higher risk for being killed, as are African Americans. Girls and boys, however, are killed at similar rates. Caregivers, and specifically mothers, are more likely to be the perpetrators of a child abuse fatality, than anyone else, including strangers, relatives, and non-relative caregivers. Family situations which place children at risk include moving, unemployment, having non-family members living in the household. A number of policies and programs have been put into place to try to better understand and to prevent child abuse fatalities, including: safe haven laws, child fatality review teams, training for investigators, shaken baby syndrome prevention programs, and child abuse death laws which mandate harsher sentencing for taking the life of a child. - created at http://animoto.com
Body Snatchers
Because being a child shouldn't hurt
Child abuse is the physical, sexual, emotional mistreatment, or neglect of children.[1] In the United States, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) define child maltreatment as any act or series of acts of commission or omission by a parent or other caregiver that resul...ts in harm, potential for harm, or threat of harm to a child.[2] Most child abuse occurs in a child's home, with a smaller amount occurring in the organizations, schools or communities the child interacts with.[citation needed] There are four major categories of child abuse: neglect, physical abuse, psychological/emotional abuse, and child sexual abuse.
Different jurisdictions have developed their own definitions of what constitutes child abuse for the purposes of removing a child from his/her family and/or prosecuting a criminal charge. According to the Journal of Child Abuse and Neglect, child abuse is "any recent act or failure to act on the part of a parent or caretaker which results in death, serious physical or emotional harm, sexual abuse or exploitation, an act or failure to act which presents an imminent risk of serious harm".[3] A person who feels the need to abuse or neglect a child may now be described as a "pedopath"
Valley, AL – February 9, 2011 – Author of the forthcoming book Comfort Food for the Mind, Body, and Soul, Sharon Fox is about to declare war on Childhood Sexual Abuse. Her cookbook actually tells stories of her own sexual abuse between sections of delicious recipes. Set to release on April 30, 2011, Fox has pledged to use some proceeds from her book sales to provide literature about statistics, help lines, and warning signs to the public in her attempt to bring awareness to communities nationwide. “This is a topic that has been taboo for so many years. We need to save the innocence of our children, and I want to do my part in helping fight this terrible crime.”
Sharon Fox says that once she decided to talk about her own experiences, she noticed that it was actually a very common crime. One in four girls and one in six boys, according to studies revealed recently on an Oprah Winfrey show episode featuring Tyler Perry, are sexually abused by the time they turn 18 years old. Comedian and actress, Mo’Nique was also sexually abused as a child. Sharon Fox says hearing their stories actually helped her heal from her own painful childhood experience.
The Southern Hospitality Protect Our Children Tour will launch on April 30, 2011. Sharon is seeking donations and corporate sponsors to help keep the tour going for the next 2 years. For information on how you or your company can support this tour, go to her website www.goodcookin4u2.webs.com for details. Sharon says sponsors will be recognized on all ads, program material, media, and internet websites and social networks that she is connected with.
Sharon says, “I’m not worried about being a famous author or TV personality. I’m not interested in being Paula Deen or Rachel Ray, I just want to use my experiences and how I survived them to inspire others to find the strength inside to live a positive, productive life. I have lived on disability for the last 5 years, but I am still determined to do all I can to preserve the innocence of children, and inspire them to live the life they were born to live.”
Comfort Food for the Mind, Body, and Soul has taken three long years to complete. Sharon is looking forward to its release in April to launch her Protect Our Children Tour. She was named Culinary Artist of the Social Networks in January by marketing and event management company FBC Records out of Atlanta, GA. She plans to tour for this cause and do book signings and interviews for 2 years and then release a series of many more cookbooks.
Studies have shown the single biggest indicator of a child becoming involved in the juvenile justice system, is a history of ear
To assist those who want to combat youth violence and its horrible side-effects by sharing valuable resource information and ideas.
To you Arkansans, that's what I do for DHS/DYS. We help to build community collaborations to make our cities and towns safer and healthier for our fellow citizens.
And to those of you out of state, I do consulting work on community response to youth crime/gang issues. Nawojczyk@me.com for info.
To share information on youth issues. Contact Crystal@GangWar.com for more information.
Last Sunday's New York Times carried a story that I believe all parents of teenagers need to read.
How Sexting Changed So Many Lives
Here's how the article began:
LACEY, Wash. — One day last winter Margarite posed naked before her bathroom mirror, held up her cellphone and took a picture. Then she sent the full-length frontal photo to Isaiah, her new boyfriend.
Both were in eighth grade.
They broke up soon after. A few weeks later, Isaiah forwarded the photo to another eighth-grade girl, once a friend of Margarite’s. Around 11 o’clock at night, that girl slapped a text message on it.
“Ho Alert!” she typed. “If you think this girl is a whore, then text this to all your friends.” Then she clicked open the long list of contacts on her phone and pressed “send.”
In less than 24 hours, the effect was as if Margarite, 14, had sauntered naked down the hallways of the four middle schools in this racially and economically diverse suburb of the state capital, Olympia. Hundreds, possibly thousands, of students had received her photo and forwarded it.
Charged With Dissemination Of Child Pornography
Rick Peters, the county prosecutor, decided against charging Margarite. But he did charge three students with dissemination of child pornography, a Class C felony, because they had set off the viral outbreak.
After school had been let out that day in late January, the police read Isaiah his rights, cuffed his hands behind his back and led him and Margarite’s former friend out of the building. The eighth graders would have to spend the night in the county juvenile detention center.
The two of them and a 13-year-old girl who had helped forward the photo were arraigned before a judge the next day.
Charge Amended To Telephone Harassment
The New York Times reports that eventually a deal was brokered for the three teenagers who were charged. The offense would be amended from the child pornography felony to a gross misdemeanor of telephone harassment. Isaiah and the two girls who had initially forwarded Margarite’s photo would be eligible for a community service program that would keep them out of court, and the case could be dismissed.
There are many disturbing aspects to this story of "sexting," or sending sexual photos, videos or texts from one cellphone to another.
Double Standard: Girls Are Sluts, Boys Are Show-Offs
One aspect is the double standard, the same double standard that plagues all women. A boy caught sending a phot of himself might be seen as a fool or a show-off, but a girl whose photo goes viral is likely to be branded a slut. Sound familiar?
The casual nature of this sexting struck me too. Again, from The New York Times:
How had the sexting from Margarite begun?
“We were about to date, and you’ll be like, ‘Oh, blah blah, I really like you, can you send me a picture?’ ” Isaiah recalled.
“I don’t remember if I asked her first or if she asked me. Well, I think I did send her a picture. Yeah, I’m pretty sure. Mine was, like, no shirt on.
“It is very common,” he said. “I’d seen pictures on other boys’ cellphones."
They weren't even dating, and she sent him a naked picture of herself?
Sexting Can Have Fatal Consequences
As the New York Times article points out, sexting is not illegal, but if it involves an under-18-year-old, then it may be child pornography. And it may have much bigger consequences, as Care2's Amelia Thomson-DeVeaux explained here, writing about the sexting-related suicide of a young woman.
The reality is that teenagers are surrounded by highly sexualized messages, including endless songs and music videos that promote sexting.
So it is all the more important that parents stay in touch with their teenage children, talk to them, monitor their behavior, let them know that sexting is dangerous and demeaning - in short, that parents do some parenting on this issue that is not going away.
Parents And Teachers Need To Take Action
Adults in positions of authorities need to take action too. Many school districts have banned sexting and now authorize principals to search cellphones. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, at least 26 states have tried to pass some sort of sexting legislation since 2009.
According to The New York Times, an Internet poll conducted for The Associated Press and MTV by Knowledge Networks in September 2009 indicated that 24 percent of 14- to 17-year-olds had been involved in “some type of naked sexting,” either by cellphone or on the Internet.
Michael Ruppert is the author of Crossing The Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil. Published in September 2004 and is one of the three best-selling books globally and in the US about the attacks of 9/11. Rubicon is the only book to show that Vice President Richard Cheney, the US government and Wall Street had a well-developed awareness of Peak Oil before the 9/11 attacks and that US policy since then has been consistent with Peak Oil imperatives. In May, 2006 Crossing the Rubicon was added to the Harvard School of Business library and released in a French version with distribution throughout all major book stores in France.
Mike is also the publisher/editor of From The Wilderness, a newsletter read in more than 50 countries around the world. Its subscribers include 60-plus members of the US congress, professors at more than 40 universities around the world, and major business and economic leaders. Since 9/11 Mike has been in demand as a university lecturer and has spoken on Peak Oil and 9/11 in nine countries. Recently, at the request of Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, he served as an official questioner during a Congressional briefing looking into unanswered questions and the unaddressed flaws of the Keane Commission report. Having concluded that the US government and markets will be useless in preparing American citizens for the coming crisis, Mike's current focus is on individual and community preparedness for the coming challenges and the development of a reliable news service to quickly identify and track breaking developments around the world.
Mike is a former LAPD narcotics investigator, whistleblower and a 1973 Honors Graduate of UCLA in Political Science. After attempting to expose this he was forced out of LAPD in 1978 while earning the highest rating reports possible and having no pending disciplinary actions. In 1996, after 18 years of struggle, he finally achieved one of his deepest wishes in a face to face public encounter with then CIA Director John Deutch on national television. Washington sources later told Mike that Deutch's mishandling of the encounter cost him a guaranteed appointment as Secretary of Defense.
On November 28, 2001 Mike gave his first post 9-11 lecture at Portland State University, which was attended by more than 1,000 and resulted in a standing ovation. FTW's video, The Truth and Lies About 9-11, has sold more than 15,000 copies. It includes special exclusive interviews with Representatives Ron Paul (R-TX), Cynthia McKinney (D-GA), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Professor Peter Dale Scott, (UC, Berkeley), Professor John Metzger (Michigan State) and Catherine Austin Fitts (former Assistant Secretary of Housing and Managing Director, Dillon Read).
“Anyone can give up, it's the easiest thing in the world to do. But to hold it together when everyone else would understand if you fell apart, that's true strength.”
DATS SOME WORDS...
strong men(but after they will be losers) dont cry they break down on one two three one day.it is happend sometimes when they tryna change the rules of game and regrets after,but it is too late,no more chanсes,no more sense,no love no hate for the LOSER.just sweet victory for the winner who didnt do mistakes,was smarter and had seen the bullshit first....
Dr. Margaret Jamal gave me permission to place her video here for you. Please share this.. Visit Dr. Jamal's website for help and support www.mytimetotell.org
Mildred Jeter was born in 1939. She was of African and Rappahannock (Native American) descent.
Richard Loving was born in 1933. He was of Caucasian (white) descent.
Mildred and Richard were childhood sweethearts in Caroline County, Virginia. When they grew up, they decided to marry.
The marriage laws in Virginia said that no white person could marry a non-white person, so the Lovings were married in June, 1958 in Washington..
After they returned home, the local sheriff burst into their bedroom and arrested Mr. and Mrs. Loving.
To avoid going to jail, the couple had to leave Virginia.
The Lovings moved to Washington, but in time were frustrated that they could not visit their families in Virginia.
in 1963, Mrs. Loving wrote the US Attorney General, Robert F. Kennedy, who referred her case to the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union). The case was taken all the way to the US Supreme Court.
On June 12, 1967. the Supreme Court ruled that the laws forbidding inter-racial marriages were unconstitutional.
After the Supreme Court decision, Mr. and Mrs. Loving moved back to Virginia to raise their own three children.
Mildred and Richard Loving supported everyone's right to marry.
In honor of the Lovings, June 12th is known as Loving Day - a day to celebrate mixed-race marriages.
Mildred Jeter was of African-American and RappahannockNative American descent. Richard Loving was of European descent. The couple met when she was 11 and he was 17. He was a family friend and years later they began dating. They lived in Virginia, where interracial marriage was banned by the Racial Integrity Act of 1924. When Mildred was 18 she became pregnant, and the couple decided to marry in June 1958. They traveled to Washington, DC to do so. Loving later stated that when they married in 1958, she did not realize their marriage was illegal in Virginia, but she later believed her husband knew the fact.[2]
The Virginia Racial Integrity Act of 1924 criminalized marriages between white and non-white persons. After the Lovings' return home to the tiny town of Central Point in Caroline County, they were arrested at night by the county sheriff, who had received an anonymous tip.[3] The Lovings were charged under Virginia's anti-miscegenation law with "cohabiting as man and wife, against the peace and dignity of the Commonwealth."
The Lovings pled guilty and were convicted by the Caroline County Circuit Court on January 6, 1959. They were sentenced to one year in prison, suspended for 25 years on the condition that they leave the state. They moved to the District of Columbia. In 1964,[4] frustrated by their inability to travel together to visit their families in Virginia, Mildred Loving wrote in protest to Attorney GeneralRobert F. Kennedy. Kennedy referred her to the American Civil Liberties Union.[3]
The ACLU filed a motion on the Lovings' behalf to vacate the judgment and set aside the sentence, on the grounds that the statutes violated the Fourteenth Amendment. This began a series of lawsuits which ultimately reached the United States Supreme Court. On October 28, 1964, when their motion still had not been decided, the Lovings began a class action suit in United States district court. On January 22, 1965, the district court allowed the Lovings to present their constitutional claims to the Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals. Virginia Supreme Court Justice Harry L. Carrico wrote the court's opinion upholding the constitutionality of the anti-miscegenation statutes and affirmed the criminal convictions. (He was later Chief Justice of the Virginia Court.)
The Lovings and ACLU then appealed the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court. The case, Loving v. Virginia, was decided unanimously in the Lovings' favor on June 12, 1967. The Court overturned their convictions, dismissing Virginia's argument that the law was not discriminatory because it applied equally to and provided identical penalties for both white and black persons. The Supreme Court ruled that the anti-miscegenation statute violated both the due process and equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Lovings returned to Virginia after the Supreme Court decision.
Mildred Loving said she considered her marriage and the court decision to be God's work. She supported everyone's right to marry whomever he or she wished.[5] In 1965, while the case was pending, she told the Washington Evening Star, "We loved each other and got married. We are not marrying the state. The law should allow a person to marry anyone he wants."[2] On June 12, 2007, Mildred Loving issued a statement on the 40th anniversary of the Loving v. Virginia Supreme Court decision.[6]
Her statement concluded:
My generation was bitterly divided over something that should have been so clear and right. The majority believed that what the judge said, that it was God's plan to keep people apart, and that government should discriminate against people in love. But I have lived long enough now to see big changes. The older generation's fears and prejudices have given way, and today's young people realize that if someone loves someone, they have a right to marry. Surrounded as I am now by wonderful children and grandchildren, not a day goes by that I don’t think of Richard and our love, our right to marry, and how much it meant to me to have that freedom to marry the person precious to me, even if others thought he was the 'wrong kind of person' for me to marry. I believe all Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry. Government has no business imposing some people’s religious beliefs over others. Especially if it denies people's civil rights.
I am still not a political person, but I am proud that Richard's and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight, seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That’s what Loving, and loving, are all about.
Miscegenation (Latin miscere "to mix" + genus "kind") is the mixing of different racial groups, a social construct, through marriage, cohabitation, sexual relations, and procreation.[1]
The term miscegenation has been used since the 19th century to refer to interracial marriage and interracial sex,[1] and more generally to the process of racial admixture, which has taken place since ancient history. The term entered historical records during European colonialism since the Age of Discovery, but societies such as China and Japan also had restrictions on marrying with peoples they considered different. Historically the term has been used in the context of laws banning interracial marriage and sex, so-called anti-miscegenation laws. It is a potentially offensive word.[2][3]
Etymological history
Miscegenation comes from the Latinmiscere, "to mix" and genus, "kind". The word was coined in the U.S. in 1863, and the etymology of the word is tied up with political conflicts during the American Civil War over the abolition of slavery and over the racial segregation of African-Americans. The reference to "genus" was made to emphasize the supposedly distinct biological differences between whites and non-whites, though all humans belong to the same genus, Homo, same species, Homo sapiens and same subspecies, Homo sapiens sapiens.
The word was coined in an anonymous propagandapamphlet published in New York City in December 1863, during the American Civil War. The pamphlet was entitled Miscegenation: The Theory of the Blending of the Races, Applied to the American White Man and Negro.[6] It purported to advocate the intermarriage of whites and blacks until they were indistinguishably mixed, as a desirable goal, and further asserted that this was the goal of the Republican Party. The pamphlet was a hoax, concocted by Democrats, to discredit the Republicans by imputing to them what were then radical views that offended against the attitudes of the vast majority of whites, including those who opposed slavery. There was already much opposition to the war effort; in New York in particular the opposition reached heights of the Draft Riots, that included numerous lynchings.
The pamphlet and variations on it were reprinted widely in both the north and south by Democrats and Confederates. Only in November 1864 was the pamphlet exposed as a hoax. The hoax pamphlet was written by David Goodman Croly, managing editor of the New York World, a Democratic Party paper, and George Wakeman, a World reporter.
By then, the word miscegenation had entered the common language of the day as a popular buzzword in political and social discourse. The issue of miscegenation, raised by the opponents of Lincoln, featured prominently in the election campaign of 1864.
In the United States, miscegenation has referred primarily to the intermarriage between whites and non-whites, especially blacks.
Before the publication of Miscegenation, the word amalgamation, borrowed from metallurgy, had been in use as a general term for ethnic and racial intermixing. A contemporary usage of this metaphor was Ralph Waldo Emerson's private vision in 1845 of America as an ethnic and racial smelting-pot, a variation on the concept of the melting pot. Opinions in the U.S on the desirability of such intermixing, including that between white Protestants and Irish Catholic immigrants, were divided. The term miscegenation was coined to refer specifically to the intermarriage of blacks and whites, with the intent of galvanising opposition to the war.[7]
Laws banning "race-mixing" were enforced in Nazi Germany (the Nuremberg Laws) from 1935 until 1945, in certain U.S. states from the Colonial era until 1967 and in South Africa during the early part of the Apartheid era. All these laws primarily banned marriage between spouses of different racially or ethnically defined groups, which was termed "amalgamation" or "miscegenation" in the U.S. The laws in Nazi Germany and many of the U.S. states, as well as South Africa, also banned sexual relations between such individuals.
In the United States, the various state laws prohibited the marriage of whites and blacks, and in many states also the intermarriage of whites with Native Americans or Asians.[8] In the U.S., such laws were known as anti-miscegenation laws. From 1913 until 1948, 30 out of the then 48 states enforced such laws.[9] Although an "Anti-Miscegenation Amendment" to the United States Constitution was proposed in 1871, in 1912–1913, and in 1928,[10][11] no nation-wide law against racially mixed marriages was ever enacted. In 1967, the United States Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Loving v. Virginia that anti-miscegenation laws are unconstitutional. With this ruling, these laws were no longer in effect in the remaining 16 states that still had them.
The laws in U.S. states were established to maintain "racial purity" and white supremacy. Such laws were passed in South Africa because of fears that the white minority would be "bred-out" by the black majority.
The Nazi ban on interracial marriage and interracial sex was enacted in September 1935 as part of the Nuremberg Laws, the Gesetz zum Schutze des deutschen Blutes und der deutschen Ehre (The Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honour). The Nuremberg Laws classified Jews as a race, and forbade marriage and extramarital sexual relations between persons of Jewish origin and persons of "German or related blood". Such intercourse was condemned as Rassenschande (lit. "race-disgrace") and could be punished by imprisonment (usually followed by deportation to a concentration camp) and even by death.
The Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act in South Africa, enacted in 1949, banned intermarriage between different racial groups, including between whites and non-whites. The Immorality Act, enacted in 1950, also made it a criminal offense for a white person to have any sexual relations with a person of a different race. Both laws were repealed in 1985.
L-R: SUBSTANCE ABUSE COUNSELOR JOE BLACK, CO-CHAIR VICTOR PATE, CHAIRMAN DENNIS LEVY, VESID COUNSELOR KEVIN MCMULLEN, N.Y.C. DEPART. OF EDUCATION CASE MANAGER MS. FERGUSON, COLLEGE TO COMMUNITY FELLOWSHIP LESLIE CAMPBELL RECRUITMENT SPECIALIST, CO-FOUNDER MALIKA WILSON
More info @ http://justiceforbobbyyates.blogspot.com/ Excerpt from online radio program Black Talk Radio News, Views & Music. http://blacktalkradionetwork.com
Nixmary Brown Rally 2011 -
Nixzmary's army to rally at City Hall
BY Nancie L. Katz
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Saturday, July 19th 2008, 9:25 PM
Related Articles * Sex predator gets 35 to 40 years for two rapes * Judge tours development to get insight * Voice of the People for Feb. 17, 2011 * Alleged car thief pulls 2-by-4 during scuffle with probation officers * Only two years for meat cleaver attacker * Slain bus driver's kin want to see thug fry
*
Most moms fight for their kids. These moms are fighting for children they've never met.
They call themselves Nixzmary Brown's Soldiers, and they plan to rally at City Hall Sunday to call attention to their cause.
A group of strangers shocked by the brutal 2006 death of Nixzmary Brown, 7, at the hands of her mother and stepfather, they have banded together to demand tougher penalties for child abusers. Lapsley-Morrisroe, Suzi Quiles of the Bronx and Renee Ortiz of Brooklyn met online, where they discussed how disgusted they were by Nixzmary's death. The Brooklyn second-grader was starved, tied up, tortured and ultimately beaten to death in January 2006. Her slaying led to major changes in the city's child welfare system.
The women collected 30 pages of signatures for a petition, demanding the maximum sentence for Nixzmary's stepfather, Cesar Rodriguez. He was convicted of first-degree manslaughter in April. Now they have e-mailed, passed out flyers and contacted advocates and politicians to call for a minimum of life in prison without parole for child killers, as well as a nationwide criminal database to screen foster parents.
"We are just a bunch of moms who really had enough and figured something needs to change," said Quiles, 37, who burst into tears as she recalled the funeral she attended for 3-year-old Kyle Smith, who was beaten to death in Brooklyn last month. His guardians are charged in connection with the crime. Ortiz, 36, said her own daughter and son remind her daily of Nixzmary and Kyle's tragic fate.
"Dear Kyle," she blogged recently. "I just wanted to let you know we did not forget about you. You are now a sweet angel. Nixzmary's soldiers will not let you rest in vain."
Dear Teddy (prayer of an abused child)
Teddy, I've been bad again,
My Mommy told me so;
I'm not quite sure what I did wrong,
But I thought that you might know.
When I woke up this morning,
I knew that she was mad;
Cause she was crying awful hard,
And yelling at my dad.
I tried my best to be real good,
And do just what she said;
I cleaned my room all by myself,
I even made my bed.
But I spilled milk on my good shirt,
When she yelled at me to hurry;
And I guess she didn't hear me,
When I told her I was sorry.
Cause she hit me awful hard, you see,
And called me funny names;
And told me I was really bad,
And I should be ashamed!
When I said, "I love you, Mommy,"
I guess she didn't understand;
Cause she yelled at me to shut my mouth.
Or I'd get smacked again.
So I came up here to talk to you,
Please tell me what to do;
Cause I really love my Mommy,
And I know she loves me, too.
And I don't think my Mommy means,
To hit me quite so hard;
I guess sometimes, grown ups forget.
How really big they are!
So Teddy, I wish you were real,
And you weren't just a bear;
Then you could help me find a way.
To tell Mommies every where.
To please try hard to understand.
How sad it makes us feel;
Cause the outside pain soon goes a way,
But the inside never heals!
And if we could make them listen,
Maybe then they'd understand;
So other children just like me,
Wouldn't have to hurt again.
But for now, I guess I'll hold you tight,
And pretend the pain's not there;
I know you'd never hurt me,
So Goodnight, Teddy Bear!
