to think my SIL spoke inappropriately to my 5 year old

[susia]

My son and his cousin both 5 were playing in my parent's garden. My parents have a big garden about 200 foot but not enormous and it is surrounded by a hedge/fence all around. Anyway, they were playing outside alone which I think is completely fine.

Anyway, my son came in and said 'Is someone going to steal me?' and I said 'of course not! who said that to you?' My SIL said 'I did, because they were playing in the garden on their own, which I'm not happy about'.

I said I was fine with my DS playing outside on his own and I had to keep reassuring my DS that noone would steal him.

I think was really wrong of her to say, I have in the past had a chat with him about going off with strangers etc but have not felt it appropriate to worry him about abduction. I also feel that at 5 he is fine along/playing with his cousin in an enclosed garden!

I think we all need to weigh up risks in any given situation without getting paranoid. The chances of someone hiding in some bushes in an enclosed garden, in broad daylight and abducting a five year old while he plays with another five year old are so minimal. There is a far greater risk of the kids growing up lacking in confidence and frightened of everything if they are kept indoors.
And creating imaginary monsters such as the bogeyman are just plain stupid.

to be fair to my SIL and something I haven't mentioned (because I don't this occured to her at the time) - my parents do have a strange next door neighbour. He is about 50, married with two adult children but about 5 years ago was cautioned for stalking another neighbour. He used to spy on her from the fields.

That obviously sounds awful and it is but to be honest, I have known him all my life as I was brought up there and although he obviously was obsessed with this woman, I really would NOT say he posed any threat to children.

I don't think this was what my SIL was thinking when she said that, I think she just didn't want them outside any longer and said it to make them come in and if I had ANY concerns with this man I would not let my son outside alone. However, I don't have any concerns and feel he fine in my parents garden.

"The chances of someone hiding in some bushes in an enclosed garden, in broad daylight and abducting a five year old while he plays with another five year old are so minimal."

Why take a risk with your children?

I think it was a horrible way to put it and could put nightmares into a small child's head...
a) she should have spoken to you first if she had a problem (though personally I don't see the problem)
b) if she HAD to say something, she could have said it in a nicer way like: "I don't think it's safe for you to play outside alone."
I'd be fuming.

I completely disagree with the phrase "You can't be too careful"

You can. You can be far far too careful, you can reduce your children for cowardly wrecks, you can stunt their emotional and physical development, you can create phobias and OCD type behavior, you can ensure that your children turn into pale, fat, frightened little fish who have never felt the heady exhilaration of jumping from the branch of a well climbed tree, who never put a non sterile morsel in their mouths, whose every moment is accounted for and whose every movement is noted.

Is this healthy? To create a race of beings who have never been without fearful supervision, who subsist in fear of a broken bone - as if it's that bad! - whose greatest fear is the Stranger That Houses The Evil Child Snatching Bogeyman?

"And creating imaginary monsters such as the bogeyman are just plain stupid."

A) That is just disrespectful to other people's view.

B)There are monster's ot there - what is Myra Hindley? What is a person (monster) who kilss chilren?

C) I could say that people who beliebe there is a small risk are stupid because it could happen and does ie MM

If you step outside your house a meteorite could fall and hit you and kill your child. Why take that risk?

If you go to bed in your own house a burglar could break in and murder everyone. Why take that risk when you could stay up all night clutching an axe?

If you go to the park, a savage dog could slip its lead and maul your baby to death.
Why take that risk?

If you pop to the loo while your kids are in the kitchen, your toaster could catch fire and the blaze could kill your kids. Why take that risk?

Notforgirls
Of course it is up to each parent to decide which risks to take with their child, I let my DCs have a lot of freedom which others would find incredibly risky.

I do think that the risk of them being run over on their way to school is far higher that the risk of abduction.

You have to assess each risk and how it relates to your DC.

We were told by the community policeman that the best way of reducing the risk of abduction is to bring your child up to be as independent and selfconfident as possible.

Notforgirls - because the chances are REALLY, REALLY minimal. This may shock you but (in the seventies) my brother got himself by tube back from school alone at 5!

We were allowed to play in the streets in London with other children unsupervised from about 8, and at 12 I used to ride my pony all over the mendips on my own. At 16 I went camping with a friend for 6 weeks alone.

I had a fantastic childhood.

Whilst I would certainly not allow a 5 year old to travel by tube alone, I would hope that by 8 or so I would be able to allow him to go with friends to the park or play outside in Bristol (where we live) in the streets with his friends. Otherwise, what kind of suffocating childhood would he have and how little preparation for the world?

Why go to the shops? Why leave your carefully locked house? Why converse with men, considering the majority of child snatchers are men? Keep the blinds drawn - most child abusers have seen their victim before. Make sure your children don't show a hint of flesh - in fact you could probably keep them safely wrapped in a sleeping bag until it's time to send them off to university - I'm sure they'll be perfectly equipped for life in Uni digs after spending eighteen years hobbled by parental paranoia.

TBGP
Great post, agree wholeheartedly

Bravo germanprison. sorry about your name, but I heartily agree with everythig you've said.

notforgirls. stupid is a strong word. but i do think transferring paranoia to small kids is not very kind. doesn't mean you are not vigilant yourself.

nfg, the fact that it can and does happen does not negate the fact the the risk is tiny.

I don't know if anybody else remembers it in more detail, but there was a case a couple of years back when a little girl was stolen by a stranger FROM HER BATH while her mum was out of the room (but still in the flat). She was dumped, freezing and naked, some miles away.

OK, so do we take the precaution of never leaving our children alone in a room? Surely, everybody on this thread would think that was utter madness. And as for 'why take a risk with your children?': we all do, all the time. The question is, what kind of risks are we prioritising? Because for me, the risks of creating a childhood that is smothered, claustrophobic, in which a child is always under watch and can never learn how to handle freedom (and the dangers that come with it), that is as serious a risk as stranger danger.

I don't know what the answer is - my dd is still very young, thank god - but I do think this SIL was way out of line.

As I said before I think playing in a secure garden is fine.

However, to go off on a tangent. I don't agree with parents who let their kids play in the street when they are under about 8. I'm sure i will be lynched but sorry - why?

hester,

i would rather that then anything like that to happen. And that child was very young about 3(?) - ur, why was she not being supervised in the bath? And she was sexually abused.

My DD goes to school alone at 6yo.

Ok, that is normal here in Germany but still.

She crosses a reasonably busy road (I watch but let her decide when to cross). She walks past a petrol station, crossing the entrance and exit, along to the pedestrian crossing, over a little bridge to school. It is a 10 minute walk.

That is my decision to make. And let me tell you, the first day she did it all by herself I swear she grew by about 5cm.

Why?

Fun

Exercise

Privacy of speech whilst still in sight.

Social development

Space to play

Why not?

the slight risk that a paedophile will approach a group of children and take one away with him/her

NFG did you read the post about the kind of childhood I had? It was fantasic. I grew up really streetwise and yes there were some risks but I was really happy and all the children in our neighbourhood knew and played with each other outside.

I think this is so important, children should be able to have fun without constant adult supervision.

I can understand some concern but I think things need putting into perspective.Kids are at no greater danger today than they were 20 or 30 years ago but the media portrays abduction and paedophilia like it is a constant happening.
My ds and dd are aware of my concerns but not so it stops them having a normal childhood including playing outside and going to the park/shop.Think SIL was out of order.

Susia,

that's fab, would love that for my kids. But I am presuming you were'nt kidnapped and sexually abused?

the things that I have said to try to warn my DS is that if anyone tries to take him away from his friends/me/etc he should not go and should tell either a policeman/trafficwarden/shop assistant/woman with children (if any are around). Otherwise, just refuse to go with them.

Someone could get in through my son's bedroom window and steal him as he sleeps. All it takes is a set of glass cutters, and it would be SAFER for the abductor than walking up to a gang of kids in broad daylight.

Does this mean I should electrify the borders? But then all it takes is rubber gloves and wire cutters.

How far is it appropriate to go in search of the perfectly protected child?

I don't think being perfectly protected is perfect at all.

I knew a girl who at nineteen had no idea how to pick up broken glass - because she's never been allowed to do it. Her reaction was to stand stock still and shriek for her dad - who came RUNNING. I've never seen anything so sad in all my life - her development was actually stunted by a man who should have been doing the best for her. She was DANGEROUSLY naive about most things in her life.

NFG, MOST people haven't been kidnapped and sexually abused, even fewer have been kidnapped and sexually abused by strangers. That's my point.

I agree susia
My ds is 7 and plays out the back of the house on a green,with the local kids all of primary school age.We know each of the kids and their parents and look out for them.Kids will only learn by taking risks.Dd starts grammar in a week and has no choice but a 7 mile bus journey.Or should could go to the local crap comprehensive round the corner.Why should she miss out?