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.

jesus, math. you are barely reading this now, i think.

oh right, what's this, Sakura? YOU were the one who mentioned projection. i had already mentioned professionals skewing the viewpoint on MN because of the things they will have seen. my line of thinking is there for all to see. read it again, it's quite a long post about how professional voices are great but can skew things, you responded to it at the time.

from that comes directly my recollection of that policeman (in fact i think i said 'that reminds me of'), and your use of the word projection. judging by the expertise on display here i gather that some people posting are child care professionals to some degree or another, and i would hazard that their (imo over-) reaction in suggesting a report to SS comes from knowledge that will not be gleaned from 'normal' (using the word advisedly again) homes.

but if you'd prefer to think that i am the kind of person who just randomly snides the victims of child abuse...?

Wow, mathanxiety you have obviously taken great offence to what I sad though I can assure you none was intended. Sorry that you feel this way.
"That is utter nonsense. Really. You are talking complete rubbish. You are completely wrong. How else can I express this?" You can express this by backing up your assertion with published clinical studies.

"And all of your speculation and admission that you know nothing really, about what happened here, in that long paragraph of yours, underlines the fact that a professional investigation will be necessary in order to find out what is going on with this girl."
No-one knows anything really and many people are speculating. I utterly dispute that it is a fact that a profssional investigation will be necessary. It's an option certainly and one that should be considered by the OP and not by you, me, or anyone else.

"Apart from the idea I am forming of the sort of newspaper from which you get your impression of the world, it is very clear that you are far more concerned with the fallout on adults here than with the welfare of the girl who may or may not have been exposed to sexual abuse of some sort, and also that you are sure (because of your misguided notion of the traits of children who have been sexually abused and possibly a basic inclination to stick your head in the sand where sexual abuse of children is concerned."

Total speculation and not true. You have no idea what newspapers I read and your opinion of said newspapers is only just that anyway, your opinion. (Who made you judge and jury?!) I am more concerned with the effect on the children involved in the case I know about, one little boy gone from being a happy, bright, sociable, well adjusted child to a clingy, depressed 9 year old who wets the bed every night (having previously been reliably dry since age 4) and is prone to outbursts of uncontrollable aggression.

I accuse you of nothing and I apologise if it seemed otherwise. We are all speculating to some extent on this thread and those speculations (through lack of information) will naturally be coloured by our own varying experiences was all I was trying to say. I obviously expressed myself very clumsily. I am sorry.

you DO need to calm down, math. big-time. you need to read back through what i wrote and respond to that, because it is perfectly clear that i have worried throughout the thread about professionals projecting their fears over 'abnormal' situations they have encountered and applying it to normal ones. it's a COMPLETELY consistent line throughout.

thelibster,
it wasn't mathanxiety who thought you should apologize. It was Namechanged, and I agreed with her.

oh, and i will be happy to apologise to any person who objects to me being worried about professional projection on this thread, btw, if they feel that i have wronged them. that's not a problem for me. i cannot, however, apologise for something i have not done and would never do, which is to snide victims of child abuse.

Aitch, you are making massive assumptions about any professional that may be posting.

Do you have an idea of what an investigation comprises of? It is not about snatching a child from their beds in the middle of the night (and any other social services action you imagine).

An investigation may involve speaking to the parents and sometimes the child. There may be no more to it than that.

"and i think there is some projection going on here as well, sakura".

this is a snide, passive-aggressive comment. It has no place on a thread about child abuse.

i don't think i'm making any assumption re what an investigation will involve, funnily enough. i know of a case where there is definite, horrific domestic and emotional child abuse going on and it was barely given any attention at all by SS when i reported it to them. would that those kids had been snatched away... it took the mother a further 5 years to escape and they could have saved them all. funnily enough, it was professional projection i think that stalled the investigation, nice middle class family, dad in similar line of business to ss worker, nothing bad could be happening there, eh?

i just think it's ridiculous, on the word of a child, not the licker or lickee, to call SS without having at least hailed a parent on the matter.

as has been amply pointed out, sakuura, this isn't a thread about child abuse. nor was it a snide comment, as it happens. and i stand by it, glad heartedly and openly. i think there is projection going on here amongst the professionals.

And since when is the 'word of a child' to be disparaged when it comes to reporting matters sexual?

I'm picking my jaw up off the floor time and time again here. Unbelievable.

Sakura I have apologised. It matters not that I didn't mean to offend, only that I obviously did. So, sorry again.

I have scaremongered? where? your latest posts are really confusing me, tbh math.

all i have said throughout is that my dd licks any old crap, that i could imagine a situation where she or a pal might lick a pal's willie in a supremely non-sexual sense, and that the situation would require a bit more investigation from a concerned parent before lifting the phone and reporting her to SS.

i have a GAZILLION pals in social work, lovely people, work hard, tough job, not well-paid etc etc. in fact, i know more social workers than any other profession, i reckon. thing is, i think they too would agree with me on this one, because they have a lot on their plates already.

i have phoned SS before, btw, as i said. was disappointed by the response, but that family ran deep and the fellow professional thing blinded them imo.

mathanxiety Again I apologise, it was not meant to be patronising.

no. you stop, scurryfunge. i am not bullying a single person. that is an outrageous and frankly desperate accusation.

and the whole sentence is worth a read, those of you freaking out at the 'on the word of a child'. one kid, saying someone licked something, is worth a call to the PARENTS. not SS.

Now you are being silly to suggest Social Workers would not deal with this because they have too heavy a workload, Aitch.

and once again, and i think this is actually the Key Point. this is not 'matters sexual', math.

if the child had come home and said 'mum, little x was giving little y a blowjob', that would be matters sexual.

'the scaremongering that has gone on...' -- passive voice here, Aitch.

Either you agree with the opinions of SS that have been (passive voice again) expressed here or you don't. Since you offered to apologise, how about it?

It is not "matters sexual" IN YOUR MISGUIDED OPINION, Aitch. The people to decide whether it is sexual or not are social services.

Please say exactly what you mean here: 'i just think it's ridiculous, on the word of a child, not the licker or lickee..' It seems to me that not only is the word of any child who may have been on the receiving end of a sexual incident by nature unbelievable, but the word of a witness is also highly suspect? Dismiss, dismiss, dismiss...

And are you really suggesting that the reporter of an inappropriate incident, age 5, would have to pass your crazy 'appropriate terminology for the act' test in order to be credible? Are you seriously saying that you would expect an innocent 5 year old to know what a blowjob was and only think askance of the incident if the proper terminology was used?
Gobsmacked here at your

.. at your obduracy.

Agree with Aitch's Key Point: We, the adults discussing this matter, have sexualised it.

"You need to do that Aitch, and make it abundantly clear that you do not see professional child protection services or any other professionals (therapists, etc.) who may have contributed on this thread as "the enemy". Consider it a public service announcement. It would be a very welcome and a very necessary statement in light of the scaremongering that has gone on."

apols. i read that para as very specifically directed at me.

good point on the terminology front, math. no, that's not what i am saying, let's clear that up.

what i am saying, and what i have always said, is that there is in no way enough information on this one teeny OP to establish whether or not this is behaviour in any way related to sexual knowledge, or anything to worry about at all.

which is why i would advise (as i believe i have done since my first post) that the OP gets some more information on events (why the winkie was out in the first place, who was playing, what they were playing etc etc) before deciding who to speak to. in the absence of any information at all i would speak to a parent of one of the children rather than social services.

now, with the greatest respect and not a whit of patronage, i would like to know whether you read what i wrote about projection, whether you acknowledge that i was talking about profession voices on here and their judgement being clouded by the terrible things they have seen, and whether you will retract your absolutely outrageous and offensive accusations regarding my attitude to the victims of child abuse. because tbh i can't really let that lie. it was completely unfair.

How can you possibly say whose judgement is clouded? You are thinking for others again. By dismissing their opinions you are writing off potential victims. That is what is offensive.