My daughter said '****'s daddy did it' and now Im scared and dont know what to do

[clothears]

My mum was looking after my daughter today and thought she saw blood on her pants (it wasnt), she asked my DD how it happened. DD replied ''s daddy did it'. My mum asked what happened and DD said ' wont be my best friend anymore' I have had the same coversation with her. She is only 3.5 yrs old. Im worried. What do I do? My friends partner did look after her last thursday night while I went out. She has been moody since then and I thought nothing of it. I have had thrush and she has been saying she is sore, so I assumed she may have caught thrush from me but its easing and there has been no blood and she isnt sore.
Please help.....

hatrick your posts are worrying tbh - how do you mean obviously the dd had experienced pain? You are totally inferring that. It is not clear (at least to me) whether op's dd thought it was blood - op said that the grandma thought it was blood.

I agree that op needs to investigate but this should be treated with extreme caution and histrionics will not help. If there's something happened of course it's very serious but if not, this man's life could be destroyed if the matter is not dealt with correctly.

I'm sorry but it had to be said.

Yes, I am still very confused.

clothears - what do you think happened? I don't understand. Your daughter didn't have anything on her pants, it was pen, not blood

I do not understand what is going on here, and am very concerned.

I think she was advised quite well in the end, and had called the NCPCC, so I would hope that she will see the correct people to see if it needs to be dealt with, and I am sure they will be cautious.

I appreciate that, I just don't understand anything about this?

Who namechanged for one post hatrick?

Why are some people finding this so confusing?

When Hatrick said, 'obviously she had experienced pain in the past' she meant that at some point in her life the little girl had felt pain. I can't think of any 3.5yr olds that haven't. She wasn't inferring that it was the man.

The blood/pen issue is not relevant, It just happened to spark off a comment that has caused the op to be (rightfully) concerned. IME it is not normal for a 3yo to say. 'x will not be my friend if I tell you'
My 3yo DS, who makes things up all the time, has NEVER said anything remoely like that.

It may be totally innocent. It may not. Therefore the OP has t take it further in order to rule out the worst case scenario.

Here, to clarify, is what I do not understand.

The girls grandmother thought she had blood on her pants. She asked her what it was and she said it was x's daddy.

Turns out it wasn't blood, but indeed pen.

Whats the problem? I don't understand.

agree with hatrick
do not think she is 'inferring' anything
I am right behind your sentiments hatrick
without any sort of witch hunt or malice aforethought i would check out the safety of a little girl AT THE RISK of wrongly accusing someone

these situations are always difficultt and of course the man could be innocent

but he could not

probably worded that wrong

accusing is the wrong word - 'questionning what went on'

is what i mean

Coud anyone clarify for me again why anyone would draw in ink on perfectly good underwear???

does it matter?

It wasn't blood it was pen- FINE.

But wouldn't you be just a little bit worried if your 3 yo daughter said that a grown up man had done it. She also said that he has pulled at her pants.

So the little girl's thoughts went something like this-
granny says there is blood on my pants
pain=blood
x's daddy did it

So there is no blood. It's still worrying especially when she then says 'I can't tell or x won't be my friend'

Could be absolutely nothing or he may have hurt her accidentally.

Who cares why she drew on the pants- whatever works for potty training- WHO CARES. They're not your pants or your childs. Nobody sees the pants. Plus if your potty training it's probably preferable to have pen on the pants than poo.

Yes, but the man was looking after her. So, presumably he will have taken her to the toilet at some point.

If they are drawing on the girls pants as part of toilet training, then maybe he drew something on them?

I don't understand where this idea came from? There was no blood.

Granny thought their was blood on the pants.

Asked child.

Child said X did it.

X either drew on her pants, or did something else involving her pants. There was no blood, ever. I think.

The ink on the underwear is irrelevant. Apparently some people use this as a method for toilet training, I have not heard of it before as isnt something I would do but each it thier own and it is not a big deal. I think the op only mentioned it to put it in context of why her dd said what she said.
Can you please clarify why this points keeps coming up, it is irrelevant. What is relevant is that op is concerned that something might of happened, it isnt something that can be ignored and she has sought advise from from nspcc. Whatever the outcome of this I am sure op probably feels upset, emotional and exhausted, even if all is ok what has been going through her mind the last 24hr is very emotionally draining. Op deserves support not people harping on about irrelevant things

I don't believe a 3.5 yr old says things like "X won't be my friend if I tell". They don't have those thought processes at this age.

A 3 yr old blurts out information with no thought to consequences IMHO.

Not adding up at all.

I will probably live to regret my stance on this.

But just because there was no blood doesn't mean that he didn't hurt her (and I'm not saying that he did) but the other things that the little girl said still need to be taken seriously and followed up JUST IN CASE because they are slightly worrying.

It is relevant as without anything on the pants there wouldn't have been anything for granny to ask about.

the ink looked like blood to the granny (maybe was pink/red?)

The bottom line is the Mother thought it all sounded worrying after speaking to her DD herself and she said he pulled at her knickers. I can't understand why people are saying they don't understand the concern or situation. Obviously CE felt something was wrong. I just hope it turns out to be nothing.

I do understand the concern. I just hope it all turns out to be something innocent.