AIBU to think there is not a paedophile on every corner

[ChaoticAngelofAnarchy]

or in every swimming pool, or every park or every newsagents, supermarket etc etc and people need to stop being so paranoid.

Yes, the other thread prompted this (so sue me...I don't really care) but I've seen this paranoia in rl and on other threads and sometimes in posts on threads that are not about this.

not back in the day round here, BTP.

I used to live next door to one, there was not much predator left in him. In his attempts to groom the nearly teen boys of Leeds, he had his house robbed, his scooter stolen, his money taken.
They completely ridiculed him and made him buy them things.

I almost felt sorry for him in a weird way, he didn't have a hope, they ran rings around him.

I'm not sure about the "you cannot be too careful"

if you took that to its logical conclusion you'd never let your children get out of bed in the morning

imo you can be too careful:

if it curtails your freedom to the point where your whole life is governed by risk aversion

if it makes you afraid of letting your children gain independence

if your fears end up isolating yourself or your children from their friends and the community at large

It's about balance: risk assessment rather than total risk aversion. Weighing the risks against the benefits.

There isn't a right or wrong answer to this. Its a question of balances.

Statistically, our children are safer from this threat than they have ever been before.

AND

Part of this is due to the increased awareness that at times can lend itself to hysteria.

SO

There is something to be said for the hysteria that crops up every now and again because it keeps the issue 'live'

BUT

Sometimes the response can be disproportionate, meaning that our children's lives can be adversely affected and parents can be more prone to unfounded worrying and fear.

HOWEVER

The usual response to these concerns is to protect our children and every parent wants their children to be safe.

ITS JUST THAT

Do many parents go too far in protecting their kids from a risk that is so small?

BASICALLY

The argument and counter argument can go on forever. Some people will draw on statistics to back up their point of view, some people will draw on theirs or someone they knows experience. Personally, I think that society evolves over time with most issues like this - going too far in either direction helps us find the best balance in the long run but its a neverending process.

I think that people need to be more aware that the risk isn't simply from ( as we said in the olden days), dirty old men. Women abuse too, all be it statistically less than men and something no-one else has mentioned CHILDREN also abuse other children, far more often that you would care to believe.

What is important is that you acknowledge that there are risks for your children and that you equip your children with the tools to stay as safe as possible. Talk about appropriate and inappropriate touch and what to do if someone tries to touch them inappropriately, be open and honest, encourage them to talk to you, explain that they can tell you anything, especially secrets. We don't use the word secret in our house in relation to surprises etc, we use surprise etc.I just don't like it. Encourage your children to take ownership of their bodies.........these are the things

So while I am not paranoid, I am careful because I love my son and want him to be safe.

xx

shaz Never really thought about not using the word 'secret' but its an interesting - and very sensible - thought. I've always been of the view that 99% of the time, 'secrets' are a bad thing. Surprises however, are obviously good!

Cheers for that. Too young to be relevant to DD at the moment but will probably forget over the next few years try and remember.

Glad it was helpful. In addition to being a mum, I worked with children in residential childcare for a long time and am only too aware of the damage that can be done to kids.

All children should be protected and adults are responsible for making sure the kiddies are safe. Something I feel very strongly about for ALL children, not just my own. :)

I think it is a little worrying that surveys show British children are far more likely to engage in risky behaviour than children from countries where children have a lot more freedom and independence. I suspect it is not simply overprotected children breaking loose, but the combined effect of many children being overprotected and a small proportion of children being left totally to their own devices (and consequently feeling nobody cares)- there is not enough of a middle ground where children can fulfil their need for adventure whilst learning to assess risks.

The other thread is a 100% pisstake and as valid as some points may be on here, by starting this thread you are just giving the other (fucking ridiculous) one more attention.

Rizzo -some of us on that thread are trying to highlight the absurdity of it, that's all.

And taking the bait. Making the perpetrator rub their hands with glee and plan the next one.

See that's the thing,I agree wholeheartedly. Children need to learn to take risks, but balanced risks so that they are able to risk assess for themselves as they grow therfore keeping themselves safe.

Swedish pedagogy encourages this, within a very nurturing environment. I.e children are allowed to climb trees, use sharp knives to cut food etc.

TBH risk assessment in the area of childcare in the UK has gone mad. Children are no longer allowed to be children just in case a parent sues if an accident occurs. Children need to be kept safe but they need to experience many many situations in order to develop a sense of risk and to be able to weigh up what is safe and what is not.

Also if you deny the possibility of children taking healthy risks whihc allows them to feel adrenaline highs, you run the risk (sorry lol) of them seeking unhealthy risks which are more available in orer to get the same high, many of which are very antisocial( drugs, stealing, fighting etc)

As adults we need to be responsible and protect our children, without denying them the experience of really living.

Should have specified I was agreeing with Cory.

But Rizzo you posted on the very same thread with a less than subtle troll comment -I don't get it sorry.

The whole CRB thing doesn't do much to help improve matters and think we've lost 'common sense'. Why should parents who have DCs at school go through a CRB check? How many have actually been 'caught' through this process since it was introduced - not many I suspect. CRBs should be there for any staff members and perhaps even volunteers that have no connection to the school etc.

Case on the news where some florists in Gloucester cathedral had to have enhanced CRB checks as these ladies could share the same toilets as the choir boys.

What's not to get? I am saying very clearly and consistently on both threads it is not real, it is a pisstake and by reacting to it as if it's a serious question and getting one's knickers in a twist about how absurd the comment is, will only encourage the op to come up with their next offensive thread. Calling them out on it is more likely to make them go away.

We are I hope a civilised community who knows what a redonculous statement it is, it isn't worth giving air.

For the record I am pretty sure the rules of troll-hunting apply to threads where people are asking for help and support, not the twattish ones like thus which are intending to offend.

Thus=this

Rizzo, what a strange view you have .

You are condemning those who have done exactly what you have done.

Progress is being made with regards to policy around risk assessment, both in children's services and with vulnerable adults (my area of expertise). Many statutory guidlines have moved from talking simply about the need to conduct an appropriate risk assessment to the need to encourage appropriate risk-taking through the risk assessment process.

Kind of reflects what I said in my post above - usually there is a counter-balancing process after we have swung too far in one direction.

One specific area of risk assessment in relation to children that I do have experience in is in planning childrens play areas. New guidance suggest that when a play area is being planned, effort should not be put into trying to eliminate risk, but instead put into trying to make risks very clear and apparent in order for children to assess them themselves.

In this spirit, I jokingly suggested that at one meeting we put a 10ft pit filled with spikes beneath a climbing frame. Didn't get a laugh. Ho hum.

SDD You're right to say that CRBs don't actually pick up many offenders, but they do act as a good deterrent both to existing staff who otherwise may have behaved in an illegal manner and also to staff who may otherwise have considered applying for a particular job. They are irritating, but on balance are, I think, a good thing.

Scurry - no I haven't! Having a conversation with you is not responding to the op of the other thread with an opinion on lone mens' right to be in swimming pools.

err - no they don't they didn't pick up the perv at my DWs school at all - had a history going back 20 years....and was employed by the scjhool within the last 3years.

I agree they are needed for staff but they don't do a good enough job as there are too many to go through. If the # of CRBs fell to a smaller number then more checks could be done.