To have never worried for a second about the possibility of my children being abducted...

[curlew]

......and to have never, as far as I can remember, made any decisions based on the possibility or factored it in to any plans I have made or actions I have taken?

Is this unusual? Do most people worry about this?

To answer pp way above: never considered the possibility of abduction or ever factored it into your plans sounds a bit daft to be honest. that's what the op said. Hand on heart, I have NEVER considered the possibility of abduction EVER and never factored them into any plans. I've left a baby in the car seat for 5mins as I pop into the bread shop for example many times. The thought has never crossed my mind that a random passerby will stop by my car, see cute baby and think, 'Oh what a good idea, I'll have that baby'. And yes, I followed all that Jamie Bulger story - it was awful and made me cry, but really, it has never made me think about how I should parent differently.

Why is that? I don't know. Perhaps I realise the magnifying lens that is popular media nowadays means we all over assess probabilities. I know these things act on our subconscious - perhaps my subconscious is less receptive than others? (being a social outcast, I suspect this may be true). Or perhaps I'm just cavalier with the lives of my sprogs.

My parents grew up under the shadow of the Moors Murderers. I was 13 when Cromwell Street came to light, and I remember the Jamie Bulger case. Closer to home a child was taken from my infants' school playground the year before I went there (estranged father took him), and when I was about 5 a man tried to entice me to get into his car. The police said he had been trying it near a local school too.

So I am not overly paranoid, but I am aware that it can happen. I am actually (in spite of my history) more concerned about DD being hit by a car!

I do think you do sound quite cavalier actually BFG. Babies DO get taken, not often but I don't want mine to be the "one" that was.

And for all those "the risk is so minimal as to not matter" how can this be true when you are on a thread where numerous people have described their experience of the situations that you say are so unlikely to occur.

Mine is sutton coldfield area.

www.suttoncoldfieldobserver.co.uk/Police-vow-pursue-reports-suspicious-activity/story-20495767-detail/story.html

I have given it some thought when they were younger but as they are older and wiser now I tend not to worry so much.
I think it depends on how old your children are and what awful things happened to other children who would be the same age as yours now.
There seems to be at least one of these for each of my children so I count my blessings, more than worry.
I don't think it helps to be blasé about it though, I'm sure some of the parents who have been affected by this didn't think it would happen to them.

Curlew it's just possible we know each other because I have commented to friends recently about beng reluctant to go camping as I would worry about not beng able to lock up the tent.

I wish I didn't worry about it so much tbh.
But I can't see how it's sensible to not ever factor it in to decision making. It is rare but it does happen and as a result there are situations I wouldn't leave my DCs in to avoid the risk.

I confess that I often think of and cry for James Bulger and his family and have done for twenty years.
And others of course.
Heartbreaking.

I used to joke to mine that if they were ever abducted, the abductors would be back within 24 hours offering us money to take them back ...

I too have never had fears of abduction, plenty of fears of other things but not abduction.

Excellents posts traininthedistance

Sparklysilversequins Tue 28-Jan-14 19:59:14

And for all those "the risk is so minimal as to not matter" how can this be true when you are on a thread where numerous people have described their experience of the situations that you say are so unlikely to occur.

Because if we were on a thread about people who know people who have been killed on planes, or who have been involved in some kind of incident on planes (or know people who may have) then we would have lots of posts too. I know one person killed myself and three involved in a near crash. And my grapevine is pretty short. This does not mean I worry about crashing when I get into a plane.

In fact this is good thread to illustrate the fact that media can exaggerate the probabilities of unlikely events.

LeBFG what a load of crap. Really? If we were on a thread about people that know people who have been killed on a plane we'd have lots of posts on that too? I don't think so. Statistics is one thing, coincidence is another. Just because you know 1 killed on a plane and 3 others in a near crash that's not statistical evidence. More likely a fluke. I doubt anyone else will come up with similar figures. Of course then you always get the dramatic people - I know a couple myself - you know those ones that hit a bit of turbulence going on holiday but the time they come back off holiday it's translated into the plane almost crashing. Talk about exaggerating the probability of an unlikely event.

Look, lots of people on here are NOT saying they were abducted. There's some hearsay (text), some 'attempts' (whatever that might mean) and lots and lots of sexual assaults (flashing and like) - some of which is reported on here third hand so not firsthand experience. So sorry if I remain skeptical that abduction presents a risk for my children.

You seem happy to talk about the unlikeliness of plane 'incidents' but not happy to relate this to abduction.

I take risks everyday with my kids: I vaccinate them (small risk of vaccine damage), I put them in a car/on a plane/on the back of a bike, I let them eat nuts (age 1 and 3), given honey to both babies under 1. If I think about it, it all started before they were born: I ate runny eggs, Camembert and pate when pregnant. All of these I have thought about, assessed the risks as well as I can, and made a decision. I do not, however, think it remotely likely that they will be abducted if I let them out of my my sight for 5 minutes. This thread has done nothing to convince me otherwise.

Well good for you LeBFG. But your sweeping statements come over to me as illogical - you put earlier something that kids know how to respond in situations. No they don't necessarily and you can't count on them knowing what to do. Some will freeze and not respond at all - dangerous viewpoint as someone could come on here read that and think what you've said is a fact. It's an assumption by you and a dangerous one. Not all kids will respond the same way so you talk them through possible situations and you make sure they know they can respond. You don't assume.

Then the sweeping generalisation about if the thread was about plane crashes then loads of people would say they were on a plane with a fatality. Utter bull shit. There were 2 planes crashes globally in 2012 going by one website. Maybe with the 6 degrees of separation you might know someone on that plane that was killed but first hand, unlikely. So, if the thread was about plane crashes and knowing a fatality personally then no you wouldn't have the same amount of responses. Possibly with near crashes included you might get more responses but for the reason I gave - people possibly exaggerating the situation. Even if loads did, statistically it would mean nothing.

No, no one has said they were abducted. But a lot of people have talked about personal situations that could have turned a lot uglier than they were. It's happened to far more than I would have thought. Far more than I think would say they directly know someone that died from a plane crash. Or indeed were in a plane crash and survived. Most people have given their first hand experiences - things that happened to them - not hearsay about second, third or fourth hand experiences of people they 'know' in a plane 'incident'.

Scientists have studied the possible effects of these foods on pregnant women and babies. They know far more than you or I could ever know through their research. Good for you for taking a chance and getting away with it because that's all that you've done - taken a chance. Unless you're a scientist and researched it yourself you couldn't possibly know that your baby might not have been one of the ones that got ill from honey under 1 year old. Your choice. Personally I would think why risk it? Babies don't need honey under age 1 as there's plenty of other food they can have, it's not like there's nothing else.

Did I mention ONLY fatalities in plane crashes? No one on here had said they WERE abducted. That is my point.

In fact NO babies have ever died from eating honey - did you know that? I can't remember the number of ill babies linked with honey eating in the States, but it was in the tens (in the whole of the States). And how many people decide to 'not take the risk' and avoid honey in the first year - loads. But it isn't a rational reaction.

And don't even get me started on pate - it's much more common to get listeriosis from eating prepared sandwiches (ham sandwich anyone?) than eating pate. There was a outbreak in the States of listeriosis from eating MELONS - so let's advise all pregnant women to stop eating melon.

So you say why risk it? And I'm saying, because we take other much more probable risks every day. Except these are 'quiet risks', risks that don't really make the news.

Frankly, if someone reports on here they were nearly abducted, I'm reading it with a proverbial pinch of salt. They could have been nearly abducted. Or not. Perhaps the guy was offering a lift in the rain. Perhaps the police are always saying 'oh yeah, there's a bloke around, be careful'. I have no way of assessing the truth behind someone's remembered encounter. The guy may even have been a pervert - but perhaps not the pervert who actually abducts children (I'm certainly led to believe this sort of pervert is extremely rare). I just don't know.

umm, plane crashes? I think LeBFG has a valid point.

I know someone that was on the plane that crashed onto the M1, he survived but had serious lower limb injuries. I was on a RAF Tri-Star that had to make an emergency landing when the landing gear failed and I know a lot of people that were on a DC10 that made an emergency landing after one of the liferafts (attached to the outside of the plane) spontanuously opened on take off and damaged one of the engines.

You have to remember that MN has something like 800,000 posters. On this thread there are less than 200 people, maybe half of whom have said they have had experience with attempted abduction/assault etc. That in itself is a small minority.

We had an incident where someone known to us who we fell out with (and I'm sure everyone says this but the fault wasn't our own - he owes us a substantial amount of money) threatened our daughter's safety.

"you know I know where she goes to school and she'd come with me if she saw me" was the most frightening thing I'd ever heard.

I'm far, FAR more worried about the damage of the known quantity.

Lady, in reply to your 17:52 post.

It is a sticking plaster. It does not make us safer, it makes people feel safer because they feel that a situation they have no control over is actually under their control.

ALL victim blaming "safety advice" serves this function. When a person says "it isn't safe for women to walk alone at night/wear short skirts/get drunk" it is because if they believe that victims (of rape or any other crime) did something to make themselves more vulnerable to that crime, it means that they have it in their power to do the opposite and therefore protect themselves from that crime.

The problem with this belief is that although it is logical, the "if" scenario it's based on doesn't play out. It is a fantasy which makes us feel safer, and nothing to do with reducing the actual problem.

James Bulger
Sarah Payne

It can happen. It does happen. You can't let it rule your life but dc need to be aware even though J B was too young to be aware. If a predator is determined they will snatch not persuade and keeping our children safe is a very basic instinct. Give them the tools to keep themselves safe and keep them close until they are old enough to understand. Most 3 year olds will follow for sweeties, most five year olds will help find a puppy.
Be vigilant until they are 11+ is my feeling.

Pate isn't advised against because of listeriosis but because it is made of liver and hence has large quantities of Vitamin A.

Although I did read something about the studies to do with that and it seems they are flawed too.

For me avoiding honey is not a big deal for babies and I would avoid it just because it's no skin off my nose to do so.

I have taken DS in a car without a car seat Shock horror most people on here would want him taken away for neglect. Sometimes you have to assess the risk and do it anyway.

I don't worry about it constantly but it has crossed my mind. My son waits for a bus 'skin's on a country lane off a very busy a road. People use the lane for drug dealing and dogging as a rat run and I have no idea who is coming up and down and it would take seconds to drag him into a car or van. So for that reason I wait at our gate to make sure he gets on the bus safely.

I don't know where the word skin's came from!

The thing is, and this is starting to sounds like I'm developing a personal philosophy actually (apologies), children develop independence and character when the parents aren't always around. To keep quoting myself (I know others have the same stories) I used to walk to primary school and play in the streets till dark. We developed stories and plays and songs. We moaned about parents and friends. We had dramas and fell out, and fell back in together. I fell out of a tree swing, threw blackberries at the local estate kids (who were really rough and had sticks). We felt brave. We prepared picnics and went to the woods to eat them. I scrapped my knee more times than I remember, and mum was never there to kiss it better. If I wanted her, I could always have gone back indoors, but I wanted to be with my friends. So....(o halcyon days..)