Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is the reason why I posted earlier in the thread about the grooming process. Many do not understand what occurs and simply brush off the behavior. The janitor was displaying behavior that could be interpreted as typical grooming behavior (repeatedly seeking and singling the child out, gift giving) with the OP's child. And by the way, it only takes a moment or two for a person to inappropriately touch a child.
Jeez what a way to go through life, being taught that any moment someone is going to harm you. Do you homeschool your children? Based on your statement above they must never leave the house since in a "moment or two" someone might run up to them an inappropriately touch them.
Again, maybe we should be a little less reactionary. Second, a janitor is not going to "groom" the child with the whole school watching. That is not typical grooming behavior. Public gifts are not the nature of grooming behavior, so maybe try interpreting what the child says. Does he feel uncomfortable? If not then the mother can just mention it to the school via his teacher or principal and leave the knee jerk reactions for someone else.
Actually, the janitor is in a position of authority at least as far as a third grader is concerned. And apparently has unlimited access to the children in this school. And, he is not a "stranger" as that term is used in the stats. These people are like the vampire who will never die trying to establish what a great guy the janitor must be.
I never said he was a great guy, you are just making that up in an attempt to develop a black/white paradigm. Do you work in a school? I do, janitors are never a position of authority unless you want to go even further around the bend and say ALL adults are in a position of authority.
Second, do you know what the word "unlimited" means? How does this janitor have unlimited access? He has no private access to this child, he has no small group access, he has not after school access.
The average janitor salary in the US in around $24,000 on the high end $31,000. With the Benefit package health insurance and 401K its not a bad job. Having said all that , If people paid Janitors what they are worth they wouldn't have to worry about creepy people being around their kids. Maybe the Janitor is too nice to say "beat it kid you bother me"
My third grader has been talking for the last two months about how the janitor at his school is his friend.At lunch time, he often comes and sits next to my boy and chats with him. I asked him if he talks to the other kids, and apparently he does, but not as much. The janitor has told him that other kids are not that friendly to him, but my kid is ( I know for a fact that my kid is Mr Popular at school - every teacher goes out of their way to tell us that), so the janitor likes talking to him.
Well, yesterday, my son came home with a very nice Santa hat. When asked where he got it from, he said the janitor gave it to him as a present.
Maybe this is an innocent gesture, this is a friendly man, liking a polite and friendly third grader and wanted to give him something trivial. But am I being too paranoid? I am concerned as to why someone should single out my child out of many to be so nice. I hate being paranoid and suspicious, this is not me, but at the same time, I don't want to be naive. Before I send an email to the teacher ( this wont be a complaint, more like a fyi...) - not even sure I would do it, but I wanted to run it by you all - other parents and school staff. What would you do? Am I over-reacting?
Thanks,
B
The blue bolded are the actions of the janitor in the words of the mother of the child in question. This behavior could be innocent but it is not "typical".
The red bolded is the expressed concern by the mother about the untypical behavior of the janitor.
If the mother has a gut feeling/concern about what her child is telling her then she should respond. How would you feel if you told the mother that she is "crazy" and not to respond, and the janitor actually did have harmful intentions?
What is the harm caused if the mother simply prevents this man from having contact with her child which she does not feel comfortable with?
Why are so many people in this thread getting upset that people are trying to protect a child (not just this child but any child whose parent could benefit from the information given) from harm? Why are so many in this thread so willing to just "take the chance" that nothing nefarious is occuring versus taking precautions to prevent harm?
It's just like saying a 50 year old saying that children don't need to wear a helmet to ride a bike because they didn't wear one as a kid and nothing happened to them in 1960. But that was then and this is now. And now we know better. Now we know that a child can be harmed by "trusted" adults/authority figures and not just the boogieman in the bushes.
The blue bolded are the actions of the janitor in the words of the mother of the child in question. This behavior could be innocent but it is not "typical".
The red bolded is the expressed concern by the mother about the untypical behavior of the janitor.
If the mother has a gut feeling/concern about what her child is telling her then she should respond. How would you feel if you told the mother that she is "crazy" and not to respond, and the janitor actually did have harmful intentions?
What is the harm caused if the mother simply prevents this man from having contact with her child which she does not feel comfortable with?
Why are so many people in this thread getting upset that people are trying to protect a child (not just this child but any child whose parent could benefit from the information given) from harm? Why are so many in this thread so willing to just "take the chance" that nothing nefarious is occuring versus taking precautions to prevent harm?
It's just like saying a 50 year old saying that children don't need to wear a helmet to ride a bike because they didn't wear one as a kid and nothing happened to them in 1960. But that was then and this is now. And now we know better. Now we know that a child can be harmed by "trusted" adults/authority figures and not just the boogieman in the bushes.
OMG. Who said the mother should do nothing??
Not me, and not most of the other posters. All we are saying is that your post bombing of 10+ links to cases of molestation are a bit of a rush to judgment. Should the mom act on her instincts? Sure just like children should be taught to. But that does not require trying to get the man fired (as wilson seems to think should happen) or assuming he is a molester.
Parents should know the people at the school and that their children interact with just as part of parenting and not because at any moment they are endanger of getting fondled.
Her first step should be to talk to her child, he is after all a child and may have exaggerated the incident entirely. Then she should follow up. I would talk to the teacher, personally, but if she is more comfortable going to the principal that is her right but I sincerely hope she doesn't walk in there blathering about "grooming" behavior based on this one incident that is actually not even typical.
You are assuming this man is a child molesting predator based on one incident that didn't send the child running for cover or even concern the mother enough to do more than post on an internet forum. And you question my judgment?
You think the man should be fired for one entirely PUBLIC conversation and a potential gift from the point of view of a child who is only 8 years old who is admittedly talkative and popular.
If your are going to wildly rush to act in a situation where you know nothing but here-say, third hand from agrade schooler, is it really that unexpected that I would satirically assume how you think he should be punished?
You keep harping about the fact he is a janitor when it is clearly evident that is the root of the problem for you. I doubt you would be trying to get the gym teacher, counselor or coach fired for the same behavior. So lets play that game. A teacher who sees the child everyday in the halls or at lunch duty, strikes up a conversation with a child not in their class. Is that inappropriate? Give the child a santa hat the child admired because they were given it and do not need it. Should that teacher be fired?
I have no idea if this is the potential scenario, or yours where the child is being pulled out of class for unlimited access time with the janitor. But what I can tell you is its equally as likely. But you are all about firing someone whose motives are not knowable based on the small amount of information you have. That makes your judgment questionable.
So now the hat was "admired" and "not needed?" Where did you get that?
I think there was a pretty strong consensus for the parent going directly to the principal. You seem to think that the principal will fire the janitor. I am not so hopeful but I'd be fine to leave it up to the person who is actually in charge of the situation and let the chips fall where they may. The principal. But no. You have assumed that the janitor will get fired. I wonder why? Could it be that you know, deep down, that a grown man giving a gift to someone else's 8 year old is pretty off? I'm thinking you know it. Right?
So now the hat was "admired" and "not needed?" Where did you get that?
I think there was a pretty strong consensus for the parent going directly to the principal. You seem to think that the principal will fire the janitor. I am not so hopeful but I'd be fine to leave it up to the person who is actually in charge of the situation and let the chips fall where they may. The principal. But no. You have assumed that the janitor will get fired. I wonder why? Could it be that you know, deep down, that a grown man giving a gift to someone else's 8 year old is pretty off? I'm thinking you know it. Right?
I don't know why you would be "hopeful" that the principal will fire the janitor. Maybe a little talk about toning it down, combined with a little surveillance by the other adults in the lunchroom is all that is needed.
I think it is innocent... but of course you want to raise your boy with good common sense... don't eat candies from the janitor, and don't drink jesus juice.
I offer to watch some people's kids out of kindness of my heart, but they are paranoid and think that I'm a molesta. Times have changed...
From what isee your son tyold you. Its really sounds like it is you ;you just don't know it ;yourself. if you want you can tell your son not to talk to him;your the parent.Sounds like your talkig about Bo Radley thing really.
What is the harm caused if the mother simply prevents this man from having contact with her child which she does not feel comfortable with?
the thing is, as far as we know, her being uncomfortable is SOLELY derived from what her 3rd grader son has told her of this man. a third grader is not a reliable source to base your opinions on an adult. as far as we know, the OP has never met or spoken to the janitor, never spoken to any other adult about the janitor, and doesn't even seem to know the full context of the story.
it would be a different matter if, after her son got the hat, she briefly met w/ the janitor to scope him out, or spoke w/ a teacher or another parent about his lunchroom talks and afterward got weird vibes about him. that would be more understandable b/c her feelings would be backed up by her own personal experience or that of another adult. for now, it appears that all she has is the word of an 8 year old. you can't condemn a man based on a story a child tells w/o further investigation, which is something several people, including me, have stated the OP should do. IMHO, too many are jumping to the unfounded conclusion that this man is either a pedophile or has some other devious reason for giving a reportedly nice kid a cheap little novelty gift. such hastily made accusations have been known to be proven false and cost men their livelihoods. no one is saying the OP can't be protective of her child, but she needs to approach this intelligibly and armed w/ as many facts as possible before accusing this man of being some sort of predator. all she has to go on is a story her child told her, and we all know how children exaggerate, add facts in, and leave things out
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
