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.
There is no need. I *need* to eat this month some time. But there is very strong desire. My dd feels very confident, strong, responsible and resourceful. SHE knows how to handle the very small risk of an attacker. She knows how to get in touch with me if she needs to.
If we only ever did what we *need* to do, life would be boring and the kids horrifically sheltered. I will take our 4 visits to the ER in 8 years of life over a timid kid any day.
I was born in 1980, so I'm only one or two generations removed from many kids today. I have to dig up the stats...I've posted about this before, so I need to look back through my own postings.
But you are correct in the media has publicized more abduction cases. That's not because crime is up or life is more dangerous...it's because abduction cases draw in viewers. We rush to our sets to hear the latest updates, and if the child involved is found tragically dead, we rush to our sets to watch the trial unfold. The news media is a business, like any other. That doesn't mean those cases aren't truly horrific....but they are also very, very rare. Our brains, however, are wired to remember the horrific over the ordinary.
Violent crime across the board has fallen over the last decade, including for adults. Yet people perceive that crime is actually rising. In 2009, 73% of people polled said crime was going up, when it reality it had fallen 10%. Our perception is very much out of touch with reality and it's driven by the media. And once we've gotten that perception feed to us, we pass it on to others and judge them for taking acceptable risk.
If you look at the FBI website, it's rather interesting. The front page has a big old banner that says "It’s nearly unthinkable, but every year thousands of children become victims of crime—whether it’s through kidnappings, violent attacks, or sexual abuse."
Okay...but it doesn't say anything about how crime has fallen or how most of these violent crimes will be committed by adults known to the child, not a stranger. But even then...there's an estimated 76 million children in the US. 'Thousands' sounds like there are predators lurking on every street corner, but it means a very small percentage of children will be a victim of violent crime.
If I were to say instead "It's nearly unthinkable how much crime has fallen...only a few thousand children out of 76 million will be exposed to violent crime this year" The numbers involved are the same, but the message is very different. This is what the media does. They're going to go for the headline that makes you afraid, because people who are afraid want help. And they can get help by tuning in next week to hear the special report on protecting your child and the products you must have to be a good parent.
Obviously the situation isn't quite the same, but it always reminds me of my sales agents. Part of their job was offering a 'side product' that went along with the main offer. They were always afraid to offer it because they thought people would get mad and not buy anything. So I would ask 'how often has that happened?" And they would get excited and tell me all about the one time they got yelled at and the customer was mean to them (and I would listen patiently and make all the right sympathetic clucking noises). Then I would ask how many times the customer didn't yell...and they would sheepishly admit that it was into the hundreds. They were letting something that happened 1% of the time or less affect their behavior 99% of the time. And because of it they were cheating themselves out of money.
In this situation, we're letting rare, tragic instances affect our behavior the rest of the time. And because of it, we're cheating our children out of independence and sunny bike rides and private conversations with their friends.
And again, as has been stated over and over, most of the cases of sexual abuse and kidnapping are done by people known to the child. Yet we don't keep our child away from their family for 'safety's sake'. The media doesn't frenzy over these cases like they do stranger abduction, so we don't perceive the danger there.
The U.S. Department of Justice reports
797,500 children (younger than 18) were reported missing in a one-year period of time studied resulting in an average of 2,185 children being reported missing each day.
203,900 children were the victims of family abductions.
58,200 children were the victims of non-family abductions.
115 children were the victims of “stereotypical” kidnapping. (These crimes involve someone the child does not know or someone of slight acquaintance, who holds the child overnight, transports the child 50 miles or more, kills the child, demands ransom, or intends to keep the child permanently.)
[Andrea J. Sedlak, David Finkelhor, Heather Hammer, and Dana J. Schultz. U.S. Department of Justice. "National Estimates of Missing Children: An Overview" in National Incidence Studies of Missing, Abducted, Runaway, and Thrownaway Children. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, October 2002, page 5.] FAQ: Statistics
Here are some more stats for you all:
Every 40 seconds in the United States, a child becomes missing or is abducted. The vast majority of these cases are resolved within hours.
Based on the identity of the perpetrator, there are three distinct types of kidnapping: kidnapping by a relative of the victim or "family kidnapping", kidnapping by an acquaintance of the victim or "acquaintance kidnapping”, and kidnapping by a stranger to the victim or "stranger kidnapping”.
Acquaintance kidnapping involves a comparatively high percentage of juvenile perpetrators, has the largest percentage of female and teenage victims, is more often associated with other crimes (especially sexual and physical assault), occurs at homes and residences, and has the highest percentage of injured victims.
Stranger kidnapping victimizes more females than males, occurs primarily at outdoor locations, victimizes both teenagers and school-age children, and is associated with sexual assaults in the case of girl victims and mostly robberies in the case of boy victims.
In 80 percent of abductions by strangers, the first contact between the child and the abductor occurs within a quarter mile of the child's home.
Most potential abductors grab their victims on the street or try to lure them into their vehicles.
About 74 percent of the victims of nonfamily child abduction are girls.
One in five children 10 to 17 years old are the recipient of unwanted sexual solicitations online.
You know if every parent locked their child in their room and only let them out for bathroom and meals (holding their hand the whole time, of course), abductions would drop to 0%! Any parent who ever lets their child leave the house before they are 18 is taking an unnecessary risk and is downright irresponsible.
I like how everyone thinks "Since it's so rare for a kid to get kidnapped..."
Lots of things are rare. Being mauled by a tiger in captivity is pretty rare. But I wouldn't drop my son in a cage with one (or in a jungle where one might just show up).
What's the need? I was never left at the park by myself, but I became a strong, self-sufficient, responsible man anyway.
I think the analogy is more along the line of "A tiger might get out of its enclosure and eat your child. Better not go to the zoo ever."
797,500 children (younger than 18) were reported missing in a one-year period of time studied resulting in an average of 2,185 children being reported missing each day.
203,900 children were the victims of family abductions.
58,200 children were the victims of non-family abductions.
115 children were the victims of “stereotypical” kidnapping. (These crimes involve someone the child does not know or someone of slight acquaintance, who holds the child overnight, transports the child 50 miles or more, kills the child, demands ransom, or intends to keep the child permanently.)
The framing of the various stats vary widely depending on your source. But let's look at these...(and thank you for posting them, now I don't have to dig back!)
58,200 of these children were non-family abductions, but not stereotypical kidnappings. This supports that abductions are most frequently committed by people know to the family.
But even if we to take the largest number (797,500) and divide it by 75 million, it gives us 1.01 percent of children in the US. So 1% of children are abducted by either people known to the family or by strangers. So why do people think this is happening all the time, everywhere? And why do they think strangers are doing it? Why are we changing our lives (and our children's lives) completely for something that happens 1% of the time?
The framing of the various stats vary widely depending on your source. But let's look at these...(and thank you for posting them, now I don't have to dig back!)
58,200 of these children were non-family abductions, but not stereotypical kidnappings. This supports that abductions are most frequently committed by people know to the family.
But even if we to take the largest number (797,500) and divide it by 75 million, it gives us 1.01 percent of children in the US. So 1% of children are abducted by either people known to the family or by strangers. So why do people think this is happening all the time, everywhere? And why do they think strangers are doing it? Why are we changing our lives (and our children's lives) completely for something that happens 1% of the time?
I think it is important to note that the vast vast majority of those 797,500 are runaways and that the "family" abductions are mostly custody dispute situations. Mom has custody, kid decides to stay with Dad or Dad doesn't return kid on the day he's supposed to.
I like how everyone thinks "Since it's so rare for a kid to get kidnapped..."
Lots of things are rare. Being mauled by a tiger in captivity is pretty rare. But I wouldn't drop my son in a cage with one (or in a jungle where one might just show up).
What's the need? I was never left at the park by myself, but I became a strong, self-sufficient, responsible man anyway.
I'm with you. Other people might be ok with the risk because it is small, but why take that risk when you can lower it to 0. I personally think the risk is higher than you all perceive, because I think most parents are like Vic and I, where our children are not left alone unsupervised where they might be taken. Like in a previous post, about letting your child ride on a bus alone to another state. Well.... if there are only 10 reported incidents of something happening to children on buses... you can't then report the statistics as 10 out of all the children in the US... It really should be 10 of all the dumb arse parents who would let their kid do that. My statistics stay at 0...
Quote:
Originally Posted by hml1976
Oh goodness. Better not let them ride in a car. Or sleep in a bed...since they're more likely to die falling out of bed. Or getting hit by lightening.
I've never gotten in an accident in all my life, and I've ridden in a car probably a million times. Should I now stop wearing my seatbelt??? What a waste it has been all these years! I used to ride on my sisters lap in the back seat when I was younger, nothing ever happened to me. Should I do that with my kids as well??
Again... I don't let my kids out during lightning, we come indoors.... I couldn't care less about the low statistics.... we are AVOIDING it alltogether. My statistics are 0. Do you let your kids out during lightning storms????
uh, you do realize that children are kidnapped right out of thier own bedrooms- when the parents were at home. Going to start sleeping with your child every night?
God, I feel bad for some kids who just can't live a normal childhood because parents "what if" far too much
Quote:
Originally Posted by cc0789
I'm with you. Other people might be ok with the risk because it is small, but why take that risk when you can lower it to 0. I personally think the risk is higher than you all perceive, because I think most parents are like Vic and I, where our children are not left alone unsupervised where they might be taken. Like in a previous post, about letting your child ride on a bus alone to another state. Well.... if there are only 10 reported incidents of something happening to children on buses... you can't then report the statistics as 10 out of all the children in the US... It really should be 10 of all the dumb arse parents who would let their kid do that. My statistics stay at 0...
I've never gotten in an accident in all my life, and I've ridden in a car probably a million times. Should I now stop wearing my seatbelt??? What a waste it has been all these years! I used to ride on my sisters lap in the back seat when I was younger, nothing ever happened to me. Should I do that with my kids as well??
Again... I don't let my kids out during lightning, we come indoors.... I couldn't care less about the low statistics.... we are AVOIDING it alltogether. My statistics are 0. Do you let your kids out during lightning storms????
But even if we to take the largest number (797,500) and divide it by 75 million, it gives us 1.01 percent of children in the US. So 1% of children are abducted by either people known to the family or by strangers. So why do people think this is happening all the time, everywhere? And why do they think strangers are doing it? Why are we changing our lives (and our children's lives) completely for something that happens 1% of the time?
Again... you have to back out of this number the normal parents that don't leave their elementary school kids in the park by themselves and actually properly supervise their offspring. 99% of the abductions that I've heard about on the news, I can honestly say that my children have never been in that situation or position. Even Elizabeth Smart, that was kidnapped in her bed.... I have never welcomed homeless people to do cheap labor at my house and have access to my home and family, or let someone from Craig's list come and pick up things at my home that I am selling, etc. Its called precautions, and they are little steps you do daily so you don't beat yourself up over it later.
.... and by the way, 1% seems HUGE to me.... is that accurate??? So I personally know probably about 300 kids, family, close friends.... 3 of them will be kidnapped?? My kids school has 1,000 kids... we can expect 10 of them to be kidnapped? I would consider that VERY high, personally.
I've never gotten in an accident in all my life, and I've ridden in a car probably a million times. Should I now stop wearing my seatbelt??? What a waste it has been all these years! I used to ride on my sisters lap in the back seat when I was younger, nothing ever happened to me. Should I do that with my kids as well??
Again... I don't let my kids out during lightning, we come indoors.... I couldn't care less about the low statistics.... we are AVOIDING it alltogether. My statistics are 0. Do you let your kids out during lightning storms????
In order to cement your argument you would have to not ride in cars at all or let your children ride in cars. Even in a proper child restraint or a seatbelt for an older child their chance of dying in a car accident is thousands of times more likely than something happening to my child at the park in 60 minutes...so your stats are not anywhere near 0.
And people die from lightening strikes without standing in a storm. It happened to the golfer in front of my Dad a few years ago on a bright sunny day...more likely than your kid being kidnapped.
As an aside, after spending last night watching The Weight of the Nation on HBO with my husband, I think it is fair to say that locking our children in the house until we are able to supervise every second of their playtime, is more deadly than letting them go to the park by themselves. With an obesity epidemic that is killing our children (1 out of 5 kids are obese!) at a rate millions of times faster than the predator in the park...it seems all of our kids would benefit from a little more playtime. The AAP recommends 2 hours of vigorous outdoor play every day for kids. How many of us are doing that?
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.
