Sexual behaviour towards another child need advice urgently

[Worriedmum34758]

My DS (5) has came to me with something very worrying. He had a few friends over to play and he said that a girl (4) had "licked ***'s winkie". Im not sure what to do about this without causing a fallout (the girls mum is a friend). I do realise something has to be done but im not sure what. Please give me your advice.

Are you saying that this little girl lives in a "culture which does not allow girls to be openly expressive and violent". I took it, from the references to SS and NSPCC that the children involved (nowhere does the OP state that the 4 year old girl was the instigator of this act, her 5 year old didn't elaborate to that extent, several people, myself included, have inquired how it came to be that the little boy had his winkie out in the first place; no answer, came the reply) lived in the UK. If thy do not, my bad. If they do, your point is?

I do not remember claiming that licking a "winkie" is "usual" behaviour for a child of this age, if I did then I was wrong, please point it out to me? I said that sexual "play" was "usual" and that licking things was "usual" in the under 5s. However, "unusual" behaviour doesn't automatically equate with "abused" or "perverted". It is "usual" for children to undergo a phase of crawling before walking, a significant minority don't, that is "unusual" it doesn't make them "damaged" in some way.

In response to your question about "ishoos", I, personally, find some folk's tendency to be so certain of the existence some kind of sexual perversion every time they are faced with an OP which concerns a child's genitalia highly "unusual". Please note that do not equate "unusual" with peversion.

There are many around here who seem fond of putting 2 and 2 together and coming up with 5. Conversely some here could make a brilliant living writing racy novels imo, have seldom come across such an abundance of over active imaginations.

My previous post was to Sakura. Sorry I forgot to make that clear. mathanxiety Not quite sure what the anecdotal ramblings of your first two paragraphs bring to this discussion, so please forgive me if I skip straight to paragraph 3. Your opinion is as valid as any other and I repeat I am not saying it is "usual", a far less emotive term, I feel, than "normal". Children of this age copy, it is perfectly possible that one of the children has witnessed such an act, could have been by accident, doesn't "prove" abuse. If that is all it is, then handled sensibly and without hysteria it is not likely to cause lasting emotional scarring as what was seen (if indeed it was seen)would have been beyond the child's comprehension at the time. However, a great deal of emotional scarring could result in an investigation by SS. Inquiries of this kind can and have, rip/ped families apart. At best they will be left with a documented history on SS records. That's a pretty serious consequence imo

What I am appalled by is the tendency for some posters to "tell" the OP what she "must" do AND imply that if she doesn't she will somehow be implicit in allowing a crime to be perpetuated. This is beyond belief. We can all give our opinions and our reasons for holding those opinions. We can all say what we would do under the circumstances. I think any reasonable person should draw the line at telling the OP what her course of action must be. The OP is the one who knows the people involved, but, most importantly, she is the one who has to "carry the can" if her course of action turns out to be the wrong one.

You are free to disagree with my assertions as to the "usual" patterns of behaviour in sexually abused children of this age, but a quick trawl through some relevant studies I believe will bear me out that the "usual" reactions are either withdrawal, and these were not the actions of a child lacking in confidence, or aggression, but these children were of comparable age/stage of development and there was no evidence of coercion. It caused no immediate, discernible trauma, the OP was not brought running at the time of the incident, alerted by some commotion or crying child. We have no evidence that this was a particularly prolonged part of their play, so we can't even claim obsession with sexual play.

I'm not saying I wouldn't be concerned, I'm not saying ignore it. The OP came on here to ask for opinions. Mine is, I would proceed with caution and be a lot surer of my ground before I took a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

TheLibster, your posts have quite an aggressive and personal quality to them, and it's not warranted. I'm talking about this remark among others 'Folk with sexual hangups, the ones who see sexual causes in every type of behaviour considered a bit "strange" are usually the ones with sexual abuse "ishooos" in my experience.'

I don't think I was actually addressing you specifically in my posts, just on the question of sexual abuse 'ishoos' and your comments that seemed to have a ner ner attitude. This response 'In response to your question about "ishoos", I, personally, find some folk's tendency to be so certain of the existence some kind of sexual perversion every time they are faced with an OP which concerns a child's genitalia highly "unusual". Please note that do not equate "unusual" with peversion.' -- does not answer my question. What are you getting at?

On to the OP:
'The most important thing is that these kids were roughly the same age and we have no evidence that it was more than a momentary thing in amongst a lot of other play. We have no evidence that either child is obsessed with sexual play.' We have no evidence to the contrary either. All we have is a report of one incident. We have no reason to suspect there have been no other incidents. We have no reason to suspect this is just the tip of the iceberg.

Most of the activities of small children of this age take place in the context of a game of some kind. They play their way through life, process their experiences and impressions through role play and imaginative play. To shrug off something like the licking of a penis as nothing more than possibly part of a game of doctors or just as harmless as any other game is not helpful. I personally think the average 4 year old girl would rather eat boiled spinach than lick a penis.

The OP didn't mention more average 'doctor game' activities. Her specific concern is with the licking, and I think she is right to be concerned. Licking is unusual enough imo to warrant the concern.

My 'anecdotal ramblings' as you see fit to call them, are no less apropos than yours on the subject of playing doctor. Thank you for sharing. Thanks also for the reassurance that my opinion is as valid as any other. It hadn't actually occurred to me that it wasn't, but I am touched all the same.

"Children of this age copy, it is perfectly possible that one of the children has witnessed such an act, could have been by accident, doesn't "prove" abuse. If that is all it is, then handled sensibly and without hysteria it is not likely to cause lasting emotional scarring as what was seen (if indeed it was seen)would have been beyond the child's comprehension at the time.

The only way to find out what is really going on here is by having trained professionals investigate. (Actually a similar question has come up just recently on another thread).

"However, a great deal of emotional scarring could result in an investigation by SS. Inquiries of this kind can and have, rip/ped families apart. At best they will be left with a documented history on SS records. That's a pretty serious consequence imo"
So you don't like social services, you think social services involvement might be worse than the possible sexualisation of a child (the girl)-- this is where we part company in terms of advice to the OP. It is never advisable to proceed with questioning of a child yourself as this can muddy the waters for the professional investigation. You can't really make an attempt to be surer of your ground before making a call about the incident and your concerns.

"What I am appalled by is the tendency for some posters to "tell" the OP what she "must" do AND imply that if she doesn't she will somehow be implicit in allowing a crime to be perpetuated. This is beyond belief. We can all give our opinions and our reasons for holding those opinions. We can all say what we would do under the circumstances. I think any reasonable person should draw the line at telling the OP what her course of action must be. The OP is the one who knows the people involved, but, most importantly, she is the one who has to "carry the can" if her course of action turns out to be the wrong one."
This is possibly one of the silliest paragraphs I have ever read on an advice forum. I have highlighted the part you have simply invented.

When it comes to issues relating to sexual abuse of children, you are talking through your hat. ("A quick trawl through the relevant studies"???)
the "usual" reactions are either withdrawal, and these were not the actions of a child lacking in confidence, or aggression, but these children were of comparable age/stage of development and there was no evidence of coercion. In the first place, "usual" reactions are not withdrawal (but I'm not really sure what you are driving at here, the sense of your sentence is hard to discern). You actually know no more than I do about the personality of the girl involved here. You know nothing about the incident and neither do I except what the OP has stated. You cannot possibly make any categorical statements ('these were not the actions....' 'there was no evidence of coercion...') about the incident. Plus there does not need to be any element of coercion for the behaviour of one child to be abnormal.

-- "It caused no immediate, discernible trauma, the OP was not brought running at the time of the incident, alerted by some commotion or crying child."
Your attempt to define this incident away is verging on baloney here, and it runs contrary to all anecdotal and professional studies on sexual abuse that I have ever come across. Pray share with us what 'relevant studies' came up with these particular hallmarks of incidents of inapproriate sexual behaviour among children.

-- "We have no evidence that this was a particularly prolonged part of their play, so we can't even claim obsession with sexual play."
An incident doesn't have to be prolonged, nor does there need to be any sort of ongoing obsession for behaviour with other children to be problematic, or indicative of an underlying problem in the girl's life.

mathanxiety I beg to differ, this is, I believe an example of a truly "aggressive" and "personal" quality, "Oh fgs, thelibster, you are talking rubbish.

If you knew anything at all about child protection protocol then you would shut up." It was directed at me rather than written by me.

I would ask you to come up with a quote from me which is even remotely approaching as bad.

"All we have is a report of one incident. We have no reason to suspect there have been no other incidents." Conversely we have no reason to suspect there have been other incidents. And please remember the report was a verbal one from a five year old.

"We have no reason to suspect this is just the tip of the iceberg." Exactly! Though I strongly suspect that this is not what you meant to say?

"To shrug off something like the licking of a penis as nothing more than possibly part of a game of doctors or just as harmless as any other game is not helpful." I am not "shrugging" it off, I am saying it is possible that it was just a part of play, or the result of some accidental "witnessing" which, would be worrying alright but not deserving of a SS record for the hapless adults involved!

"The OP didn't mention more average 'doctor game' activities." The OP didn't mention anything else. Her son told her about it. All she sad was that he'd had some friends over to play. Was she even there (actually in the room, that is) for much of the time?

OK suppose she reports it straight to SS and suppose she is wrong and in the meantime the children, her child, the parents and any siblings have been subjected to questions and interrogations of the most damaging nature possible at best, and maybe even enforced separation at worst. We have even had cases where children have been taken into care and adopted out of the family before said cases have been dropped for lack of evidence. This kind of thing can be as damaging, if not more, than merely unwittingly witnessing a sex act if, indeed that is what has happened.

TheLibster, are you drunk?

You seem to be unable to either read or write. You have missed every single point I made and responded unintelligibly.

You really are shrugging this incident off. 'And please remember the report was a verbal one from a five year old.'

(Most 5 year olds would not be able to deliver a typed report of an incident so a verbal report would be the expected form of delivery -- or how do you expect a 5 yo to report incidents? In case the form of delivery of the report wasn't your main point, what does the age of the child matter? Is it impossible for a child of 5 to become unwittingly involved in an incident of this kind?)

'....interrogations of the most damaging nature possible at best, and maybe even enforced separation at worst. We have even had cases where children have been taken into care and adopted out of the family before said cases have been dropped for lack of evidence. This kind of thing can be as damaging, if not more, than merely unwittingly witnessing a sex act if, indeed that is what has happened.'

Really and truly, do you believe this is going to happen here?

Bizarre.

There will be no SS record for any 'hapless' adult unless an investigation reveals that the adults were not 'hapless'.

if, indeed that is what has happened. To quote the Bard, 'Aye, there's the rub' -- in order to determine what, indeed, has happened, professional investigation will be necessary. Not dismissal of the incident out of concern for the adults.

And who is this "We" you mention?

mathanxty My anecdotal ramblings re playing doctor took up a couple of lines of personal experience rather than two whole paragraphs of conjecture at what you supposed might have happened behind the closed doors of another's family home, not to mention what your parents might have thought and regretted or not regretted doing or not doing or...(yawn)

And no I am not drunk. I am battling with a keyboard on which some keys are only very intermittently working as a matter of a fact. And as you are falling over yourself to point score I am usually answering the post before the one you think I am answering if that makes any sense? Not sure it does.

Sadly I do happen to know of children who have been badly traumatised by investigations and that trauma can be as bad as that experienced by the abused in some cases. Yes it is true that the fact of the investigation having taken place will remain on SS records after the case is closed.

I think the "we" mentioned is a quote from your post?

Giving up with this keyboard for now, sorry.

It might be worth asking a little further - after all it is quite possible that he has a teddy called "Winkie"

I'm not being facetious BTW, was taught to check facts without asking leading questions.

" I, personally, find some folk's tendency to be so certain of the existence some kind of sexual perversion every time they are faced with an OP which concerns a child's genitalia highly "unusual"."

NO, you've misunderstood.
NObody has said the little girl is perverted. SOme people are saying there is a possbility she has been abused, because something strange is going on when a 4 year old takes it upon herself to lick a boy's genitals.
I'm sure you understand, despite being such a liberal, 'Libster'

That's a possibility I hadn't thought of IAGTBF. To clarify, such behaviour might be sexual abuse, of course it might be. It might simply be the result of a child being told, "never put your "winkie" in someone's mouth/let someone put their "winkie" in your mouth", kids that age are notorious for doing exactly what they are expressly told not to do. It might be a childish "daring" game and therefore a quick lick and "yuk!" rather than something more lascivious, akin to a blow job, as one poster suggested practically asserted. The kid might have been dared simply because it's so gross, might even have been dared by the OP's child! All this (apart from the possibility of abuse, of course) would be perfectly "usual" 4/5 year old behaviour. In our effort to protect kids we must guard against "sexualising" behaviour which might not be sexual in a child's eyes. That, in itself, would be a kind of abuse.

Of course advanced sexualisation is one of the symptoms of abuse but in the context of same age children playing together and in the absence, or apparent absence, of any of the other, more usual symptoms ie aggression, regression, withdrawal etc. I wouldn't feel happy about putting the wheels of the SS in motion (and there's no stopping it once started) until I was a bit more certain I wasn't "going off half-cocked"

No pun intended. My bad

I'm with 'thelibster' on this one.

Too tired (just finished a night shift) to make huge comments but report it to Social Services!!??? If the OP and the mother are friends then why on earth would she find it hard to mention? If it had happened between one of my kids and a friends child of course I would bring it up - and I'm sure it would probably be found to be innocent FOUR/FIVE YEAR OLDS at play, experimenting, doing some thing that they have no realisation is sexual in nature. Giving blow jobs!!! Come on, was his penis erect fgs!!

I caught my son watching hardcore porn when he was 7yrs old. His friend had come to play and they had googled 'fuk' (friend had got the word from his elder sister). And hey presto, look what appeared on the screen. I was appalled and gutted he had seen such images so had major discussion with said child (left the other one to his parents) and he's never done it since. He is not abused, I presume did not find it arousing and was just curious and a little silly.

Jumping to such radical conclusions is way over the top imho!.

ttfn

by the way, I wonder why the OP has not come forward with any more info - might help clear this up.

Oh, the only thing I'm certain of is, I wouldn't want to be in the OP's shoes. Horrible dilemma! And I certainly don't want to appear as though I'm telling her what must be done. T'is just my opinion.

well lets think of it this way. You are at work and a child in your care tells you the same information?? Are you seriously going to talk to mum about this and then leave it? NO of course your not, you deal with it. Child protection IS EVERYONES bussiness, and those that belive it isnt are the ones that moan about SS and what they do wrong

Its a child at risk, trust me licking cock isnt something I have ever come across in my many years of working with kids, and its highly unlikely it just happened, but more likely some child has seen something his shouldnt have. It might have been he hasnt been abused but walked in on someothing, but either way something needs to be done.

I originally joined MN some years ago but didn't hang around long, a couple of weeks or so? Didn't post much. Rejoined a couple of weeks ago and yes I am on other threads. Only been on two concerning children's genitals and only hung around on those because I was incensed at/worried about the attitudes of some posters. Go ahead. Have me checked out by all means

Not saying that at all. The most unlikely people can be child abusers. We all know that.

And, thesecondcoming after checking I won't expect/need/want an apology when your accusations are proved unfounded. There are some folk on here whose good opinion of me I would value and others about whose opinion I couldn't care less.

For I am old, older than most here and already wearing, "purple, with a red hat, which doesn't go, and doesn't suit me"

You're mad, the lot of you LOL

It's making me laugh.

Carry on..........

Just checked, I'm on 23 threads altogether. So... less than 10% on threads concerning children's genitalia.

Glad to be making you smile Poppyella (takes list of "things to do before I die", ticks off, "grow old disgracefully" )

Sorry that got so heated.

I wouldn't dare give advice to the OP, and am sorry if I have seemed to. The situation is very complex and not quite analogous to a previous thread, where the poster was questioning the decision of a professional body, not having to face this alone.

Ultimately I don't think arguing over what happened, how normal it might be, is very helpful to her. But I do think that she needs to bear in mind that it may not be abuse, and not convince herself, her children, or her friends that it is.

If she feels that she shouldn't examine it further, and contacts SS, then that is her choice on a greater reading of the situation.

The two issues, basically, don't link up into one action. She can contact SS and remain open-minded about what was going on. That open-mindedness is not only sensible given her lack of knwoledge, but will help protect her, her family and her friendships from whatever is discovered.