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.

Wow - I can see this is a heated debate and that's probably inevitable but there are some unpleasant assertions being made. The emotive phrase "the word of a child" has been used as a battering ram for anyone prepared to take a step back and consider the nature of the incident that the poster has reported. WE haven't heard the "word of the child" we've just heard a third-hand account filtered through to the internet (with all the room for misinterpretation that brings - tell me about it).

I think that it is not an outrageous thing to suggest that someone's OWN professional experience in this field can sometimes hamper the chance to view it any other way. The only parallel I can come up with is when you talk to a Consultant Obstetrician about having a home birth - their experience of child-birth has been skewed somewhat by only having come into contact with problematic births where death is a real probability. Their reaction is understandable and ultimately human in some ways but they should recognise that what they deal with is not the only experience IYSWIM?

No one is saying that we should ignore what children tell us but this circumstance doesn't instantly warrant a call to SS in my mind. I'd need far more information before advising that.

Mathanxiety I honestly don't think it is at all unreasonable what Aitch is suggesting and how do you know how you would really respond if this real-life situation was presented to you as a parent (not as a professional who this had been reported to). You DON"T know enough of the real detail from the sketchy scenario posted by the OP.

well, i can't. i offered it up as an opinion for discussion, in a rather reasonable and thoughtful post on this thread some time ago. it was ignored.

but it is something i worry about. just like i worry when i see the women who have suffered DV at the hands of male partners shouting Leave him, he's a BASTARD on the relationships threads.

seems to me you're so worried about being ignored but are perfectly happy to ignore and dismiss others. mine, for example.

Reading this, I agree with Aitch.

I think it's dangerous for a bunch of people on a chat forum to claim professional status, look at 'the evidence' and decide x,y,z.

Op I think you need to use your judgement here. Do you know the family well ? I would get some advice from NSPCC and then have a good think about it.

I know that isn't a popular response but I don't think strangers on an Internet forum can possibly get a handle on what has happened and it is stupid to try.

"I know that isn't a popular response but I don't think strangers on an Internet forum can possibly get a handle on what has happened and it is stupid to try."

Yep, that actually applies to most of Aitch's and Libster's comments

No one is claiming professional status. Just giving advice, which is what the OP asked for.

Thank you for your apology, TL.

WRT: 'We, the adults discussing this matter, have sexualised it..'

and this: '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.'

It's not a question of whether the act was meant as a sexual act by the child who did it, (TL). Nobody is saying this child is a predator or was actively or purposefully having a sexual experience here at the expense of the boy. The question is whether the act as reported was the result of circumstances in the girl's life that may be damaging to her. And the people to make this determination are Social Services professionals.

'I would like to know whether you acknowledge that i was talking about profession voices on here and their judgement being clouded by the terrible things they have seen,'
No, I do not agree with your assertions wrt professional voices here. Whatever point you seem to be making about professional opinion being opposed to solid common sense here is ridiculous. You are asserting that 'professional voices' are incapable of being objective.

An attempt to label a poster's contribution as 'projection' is an attempt to cast them as less than objective (or hysterical, paranoid, less reasoned, etc), in contrast of course to your sublime objectivity. Your description of the policeman's reactions to your game was intended to bolster your opinions on projection, and to defend the use of the accusation of projection. Using 'projection' as an argument is a means of silencing and it is an example of bullying. Accusations of projection are the second last refuge of the scoundrel, imo.

While looking back for your posts on projection I came across this though:
'one of dd's pals LOVES scaring girls with his willie, he is a delightful child and from a good home. he just is a natural nudist...' All questions of whether he is delightful or not aside for the moment -- Scaring them? What scares them about it? Do they have some sort of taboo about willies? Or when you say 'scare' do you mean the normal reaction of 4 or 5 yo girls to seeing a penis (pointing and shrieking EWWW and running off)? Does you own post from a while back not suggest to you that girls of this age would be more inclined to avoid a penis than lick it?

"on the terminology front...no, that's not what i am saying, let's clear that up." So what were you saying, on the question of terminology? I ask in order to clear up your attitude to victims of child abuse and reports by children of incidents that bothered them, and I ask in light of your dismissive tone towards 'the word of a child'.

well OF COURSE it applies to our comments, as it does to everyone on here. but there are people, yourself included, who have appeared to present as people who 'know what they are talking about'.

such as here, for example "scurryfunge Sun 21-Nov-10 23:20:23

oh fgs, thelibster, you are talking rubbish.

If you knew anything at all about child protection protocol then you would shut up."

People are posting in a very officious way , alluding to 'child protection training' etc the implication is that thru know what they are talking about and anyone offering advice or experience as a parent is clueless.

I think the op has to use her own judgement on this. As Aitch says, she needs to ask more about what happened etc, as I would, as a rational adult.

Yes, anyone who knows anything about child protection protocol would not make such statements as TL did.

Doesn't mean I am giving a professional opinion, just commenting on the fact that TL would not have made the comments she did if she was involved in any way.

i can't engage with you any longer, tbh mathanxiety. you are not being in the slightest bit reasonable, and i suspect you do know that. you have so far on this thread poked fun at my children for not having gone beyond what you term 'an oral phase', you have sworn at me repeatedly (although i see the posts have been deleted by MNHQ) and you have twisted my posts to a really remarkable degree and ignored the really, really rather reasonable points i am trying to make.

i am a decent person arguing for moderate behaviour in this instance, rather than jumping to conclusions on minimal evidence, that is all.

i am, however, as a result of this and the other thread where you and others labelled an MNer a paedophile troll because her writing style did not fit with your maternal ideal, more convinced than ever that MN has a big problem on its hands with regards to the quality of advice that is available here on sensitive matters.

I also know that no social worker or teacher that I know would presume to give advice or draw conclusions from this Op because they are professionals.

just my opinion, scurry. of course you must immediately seek to dismiss it.

consider it done

Cleanandfresh, How do you know that I would not respond exactly as I have suggested (way back upthread I said to phone the NSPCC and that they would probably say to call SS, btw)? Your attempt to justify the use of the term 'projection/projecting' again ignores the effect of implicitly criticising views that are not based on implied 'common sense' of those who are accusing others of projecting.

Your assertion, thinly veiled as a question, that I would treat this situation differently if one of my own DCs were involved, is snide. What makes you suggest I would treat the situation differently?

FWIW, I personally am not professionally involved in child protection.

CommanderDrool, nobody here has claimed professional status afaik. Nobody.
'Op I think you need to use your judgement here.' Way to state the bleeding obvious. The OP came here looking for input into the formation of said judgement. Hence the opinions offered. It's a parenting forum, so questions involving parental judgement often surface and advice is often given (duh).

lol scurry.

A four year old does not see a penis as something sexual. Therefore, I see no reason why she wouldn't lick one, in much the same way as she might lick an arm or a face or a stomach (insert body part here).

What's the difference? - it's just another body part to them. My four and five year olds are obsessed with poo, wee, willies and bottoms.

OP, please talk to the mother, Not SS.

"...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."

Aitch, if you knew anything about child protection protocols here, you would not have posted this. Attempts at factfinding by untrained people can seriously muddy the waters of an investigation.

This puts me off having other people around to play or letting the DC's out of my sight for a moment.
Some poor cow has let her child go around to another kids house, there's been horseplay and the next thing she'll know she's under social services investigation.
What a sad situation however it turns out.

Don't patronise 'me Mathanxiety. You know what I mean. Op is the only person with knowledge of context in which this happened and it is up to her to make a judgement about the best course of action. Only she knows the circumstances and it is far better to get advice and make a judgement by talking to people face to face - another parent who knows the family perhaps - rather than an anonymous group on a chat forum which is an inadequate means of communication for something like this.

Anyway, enough I have things to do.

Mathanxiety No my question was a question I assure you.

"attempts at factfinding by untrained people can seriously muddy the waters of an investigation"

As a parent that comment makes me feel paralysed. I won't try and explain why because I fear it will fall on deaf ears.

'People are posting in a very officious way , alluding to 'child protection training' etc the implication is that thru know what they are talking about and anyone offering advice or experience as a parent is clueless.' (CommanderDrool)

Yet people are posting with dire and dark prognostications here about the effects of a brush with social services on families? Whatever. Go ahead and completely ignore that.

Aitch, it's quite natural you would feel you are being reasonable. I can't fault you for that. For the life of me, I can't see the reasonableness you claim.

And I have not poked fun at your child, for any reason. Please quote for me the posts where I have poked fun at your child.

CommanderDrool "I also know that no social worker or teacher that I know would presume to give advice or draw conclusions from this Op because they are professionals."

That's as may be and would be true of most SWs. Sadly I know it's not true of all SWs.
I have seen the consequences of the SS getting it wrong. It is horrific for the children involved, and their families. I would therefore exercise caution and speak to the mothers of the children involved before ringing SS.

ROFFLE at you all dragging your disagreements on to another thread. And the poor op nowhere to be seen. Hopefully she is taking the advice of the people who have quietly posted on this thead who actually have some relevant experience.

mathanxiety "You do seem very convinced that it's your way or the highway." Actually I could say the same of you and scurry

"more convinced than ever that MN has a big problem on its hands with regards to the quality of advice that is available here on sensitive matters'

This is not a blanket dismissal of anyone who disagrees with Aitch then, TL? Sensitive matters are best left to Aitch? Disagreeing with Aitch = a problem for MN?