I’m starting to get the impression that Dr. James Dobson, of Focus on the Family fame, isn’t terribly concerned about the integrity of academic research. (via Ron Chusid)
Truth Wins Out unveiled a new video today on YouTube featuring a Yale professor who claims Focus on the Family leader James Dobson “cherry picked” his research. Dr. Kyle Pruett’s testimony represents a growing trend where leading scientists are speaking out against manipulation of their work by right wing political organizations. Pruett decided to respond after Dobson misused his research in a guest column Dobson wrote in TIME magazine debasing Mary Cheney’s pregnancy.
“When people start spinning science you have to respond,” said Dr. Kyle Pruett, professor of child psychiatry, the Yale University School of Medicine. “Journalism used to handle this, but not anymore. So it’s bounced back to become increasingly the responsibility of the people doing the research.”
Pruett is the second acclaimed professor to criticize Dobson’s use of their work in TIME Magazine. New York University professor Dr. Carol Gilligan also appeared in a Truth Wins Out video saying she was “mortified” by the manner in which Dobson’s cited her findings. Both Pruett and Gilligan wrote letters to Dobson to express their concerns. So far, Dobson has ignored personally responding to their letters and refused to engage in a direct dialogue with the professors.
On Focus on the Family’s website, Dobson even defended himself by insinuating that these professors were “liberal” and “politically correct.” If this is true, it begs the question why Dobson quoted these researchers in the first place?
This seems to be part of an ongoing problem for Dr. Jim.
Media Matters reported in December:
Psychologist Carol Gilligan and Dr. Kyle Pruett, the two researchers cited by Focus on the Family chairman James C. Dobson in his December 12 (previously dated December 10) Time magazine guest column arguing that same-sex parenting is harmful to children, have both accused Dobson of misusing their research. As Media Matters for America previously noted, Dobson made unfounded assertions in the column about gay and lesbian parenting while appearing to distort “social-science evidence” to claim “that children do best on every measure of well-being when raised by their married mother and father.”
Indeed, as Media Matters noted at the time, Pruett had previously reportedly criticized people for “distorting his work” to advance their political agenda.
On December 14, Time.com posted an online rebuttal to Dobson, “Two Mommies or Two Daddies Will Do Fine, Thanks,” written by Family Pride executive director Jennifer Chrisler, in which Chrisler noted that “when asked about his use of her research” Gilligan “stated emphatically that its inclusion constitutes ‘a complete distortion of my work’ and went on to say that there is nothing in her research that would support Dobson’s stated conclusions.” […]
Pruett also accused Dobson of “cherry-pick[ing]” his research. As Media Matters previously noted, Dobson cited Pruett’s book Fatherneed: Why Father Care Is as Essential as Mother Care for Your Child (Random House, 2001), to argue against same-sex child-rearing by asserting that children need a father because “[a] father, as a male parent, makes unique contributions to the task of parenting that a mother cannot emulate.” […]
Further, in his Time column, Dobson cited a 1996 Psychology Today article that discussed the “complex and unique phenomenon” of fatherhood and its “huge consequences for the emotional and intellectual growth of children” to assert that “gender matters — perhaps nowhere more than in regard to child rearing.” Yet that Psychology Today article focused on “fathering behavior” and did not address same-sex parenting. A 1999 Psychology Today article, “Making Over Mom & Dad,” specifically addressed the effects of “lesbian motherhood” on their children. The article stated: “Many studies over many years have found that lesbian moms do just as good a job of raising their kids as heterosexual moms do: their children don’t differ significantly on measures of intellectual development, gender identity, sexual orientation, peer group, or self-esteem.”
This is a guy who claims an expertise based on his clinical background, right?