h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I suppose you can teach them. 'No adults should ever tell you to keep a secret from Mummy or Daddy, if an adult does tell you to keep a secret then you should tell mummy right away' .. and 'You have the right not be hugged, or touched in any way you want'. But that would mean that family members couldn't insist on cuddles.

I don't know if this would work to be honest.

>>..that would mean that family members couldn't insist on cuddles. <<

Happily none of many relatives was a perv, but
oh me, oh my, if we'd had laws like that I'd not
have had to suffer the lipstick smears and reeking
powders and scents of all my Aunties. Might even
have avoided Grampa's stubble.


~jwf~

>>It also paradoxically felt like much less of a responsibility dealing with four kids than it would have done if there was just one.<<

As long as they're not toddlers and they got something to do, a small group kids will generally look after themselves. When I was uni I developed a bit of a niche looking after the kids of my foster folks and their friends on New Years Eve (I've never really cared about New Years myself) and the kids - late primary school in age - really didn't much supervision: just a replenishment of snacks/juice, changing the DVDs and keeping an eye on sharp implements and making sure they never mixed with the kids.

I stress to add, this wasn't done for free. I took substantial payment in booze.

Yes but 'no secrets' doesn't really work because there are nice secrets too, aren't there, like birthday presents.

I grew up in a town where a seven year old boy went missing after going to the fair with friends, and was never found, alive or dead. IIRC somebody was, years (possibly decades) later charged with his murder. I was 13 or 14 at the time, with a small brother, so from that point I was acutely aware of 'stranger danger'. But by the time I had my own kids I was more aware that actually, usually, it isn't a stranger. Did 'stranger danger' come in as a concept (I mean, with government information films etc) as a result of the Moors murders?

Anyway, we have a password (well - I do - not sure if husband remembers this). My children when they are out in the village know which houses are 'friendly' houses - I mean with people living there that we know and trust, if they needed help; and yes of course we could be wrong, but frankly you can't keep thinking about that as a parent or (a) your head would explode and (b) you wouldn't let your children out, ever.

At the age of five my children would all have been asleep at 7.30pm on a school night. But, different families do different things. My children were also all early risers, and I often worked in the evenings (so needed them tucked up early). And I've a feeling each of my children walked to the postbox and back by themselves well before they were school age, with me standing watching them the whole way, apart from that heart-thumping ten seconds when the arrangement of buildings meant they were completely out of sight. It's like that *all the time* as a parent: you want to protect them and keep them safe, but it is your job, as a parent, to let them take risks and learn how to manage them for themselves.

Parents are the best people to judge this, because they know their child best. But it's still hard, and nobody can get that right all the time. I am sure April's parents are agonising right now over whether they did the right things, in the freedoms they allowed their daughter, in what they taught her about strangers. But the point is, even if they did do something wrong, most of us get things wrong fairly frequently, it's just that things work out and it doesn't matter.

Mol

I think you can tell even quite small children that they shouldn't allow people to do things to/with/in front of them that make them feel uncomfortable, strange or hurt them. That's enough information.

You then have to give a caveat to that: doctors sometimes make you feel a bit uncomfortable, and parents sometimes have to grab an arm to drag them away from an oncoming bus that might hurt. But sensible people are the majority, I'm sure.

As for the hugging and kissing by relatives: I've never had to submit to that unless I wanted to and have made it very clear to my children and my relatives that it is not expected and if the Gruesomes don't want to, they don't have to hug or kiss any relatives. Luckily it's never been an issue. Of course now they are horrible teenagers I have to tell the aunties that they don't have to hug or kiss the Gruesomes if they don't want... They are all, however, expected to be polite at all times.

There are exceptions to that, of course. Not sure if she's right or wrong (but she has done a lot of research, and it's her decision, with my brother) my s-i-l tells her son to hug all family members when meeting or leaving and that he should try to look them in the eye when he does so. He has aspergers and it's part of training him to socialise.

As for Stranger Danger. Not sure when it came in but... when do you determine that someone is no longer a stranger? If the children have seen someone regularly chat to the parents, or come to the house, how can little children determine that they are friends, acquaintences or Harry the Mobster collecting on a loan repayment?

Interesting. I think I've said before that the greatest risk, by some margin, to my kids (7 and 4) is being squashed by a car or lorry.

So we nag them a lot on that, and they can't really go down the park on their own, purely for that reason (I live in a city).

Also because of serious food allergies, they are not allowed to take food from someone outside of the family, and we're pretty firm on that - not worth the risk.

Other risks, like falling off a swing or climbing frame, we let them take within reason. There really is only one way to learn what is foolish or not...

For the abduction/other nasty people - really, this is a very small risk. We use local babysitters, sons of neighbours etc - you would go barmy if you didn't trust at least people you know well, no?

sprout

I used a technique similar to Sho, that my children were told not to go off with anyone, even someone they knew, unless I had given instruction for them to do so.

However much you tell them you can't guard against the silver tongued offender (known or unknown to the child) who can so easily dupe a child into voluntarily entering a vehicle or engaging in undesirable activity.

Even adults can be fooled - often I think you just have to trust your instinct. If the child seems totally comfortable in the care of someone else, it's probably OK.

As sprout mentioned you need to take care of the larger risks before the smaller risks.

Larger risks
a) cars (solution don't allow kids out into the street)
b) kitchen (solution don't allow kids into the kitchen)
c) bathroom (solution don't allow kids into the bathroom)
d) choking on food (solution puree all food, and use a straw)
e) water (solution don't allow kids near to water)
f) being molested by an uncle (solution don't allow kids near to uncles)
g) being molested by a step dad (solution don't allow kids near to step-dads)
h) being molested by a teacher (solution don't allow kids near to teachers)
i) being hit by a falling object (solution kids to wear a tin helmet)
j) ...

Daily Mail logic: adults might do bad things to kids, so we should ban adults.

surely they would perfer to ban the kids first

On the plus side, it seems like it's easy to get an easy bit of tit if you work in BBC Radio.

Wonder what Number Six is doing these days.

B

As non-parent I'm not sure if I should be jumping in, but I second the view that children should generally be taught to avoid people and actions they feel uncomfortable more than specific rules. People (generally) have a good feel for these things, and at the same time I'm not sure that kids can really remember any list of rules detailed enough work well in real life. That said teaching them guidelines or giving them specific examples may help.

Unfortunately, children do not feel uncomfortable in many situations where adults would. A lot of this springs back on parents who don't adequately convey emotional intelligence.

B

I don't think it's only parents who should be able to comment on this kind of thing, but then I'm an old fashioned kind of gal and I think that we all have a part to play in bringing up children.

Of course a huge part of that is not kidnapping and killing them.

>>Of course a huge part of that is not kidnapping and killing them<<

Spoil my fun

A related issue is the question of at what age can you leave your kids at home alone, and for how long. There doesn't seem to be any age specified in law, instead the parent has to make the decision based on the maturity of the child, and the safety of the environment. The trouble is, accidents can happen to anyone at any time, and there's always the worry that the one time you pop out for five minutes, something unexpected will happen, and the unsympathetic authorities decide you were negligent for having a kitchen equipped with spoons which could be swallowed, or a cooker capable of inflicting burns; because let's face it, the whole house could be seen as an accident waiting to happen, if a vindictive court chose to view it that way.

There also seems to be inconsistencies with how long you can leave kids at home, compared to letting them go outside. It's seen as healthy for kids to play in the park for a couple of hours, but risky for them to stay at home for that time. What's more, there's this puzzling quote from the NSPCC website:
"For example, most parents would think it is okay to leave a 16-year-old alone for the evening. But to leave them for a week would be unacceptable."

Surely if someone is old enough to be legally married and have kids of their own, it's just possible that you can give them a week or so on their own?

I do wonder sometimes about charities like the NSPCC. They really don't do themselves any favours by putting out utter tripe like that. It undermines their credibility. Didn't anyone in their office look at that at any stage and go "hang on..."? And if not, what does that say about the kind of numpties that must populate their offices? Are those the kind of people you'd donate money to and have ANY confidence it would be put to any good use?

What? That's insane - a 16 year old could well have a house or flat of their own! Indeed the lady that sits opposie me at work did, both her parents were deceased by the time she was that age.

When I was a kid, I had two “incidents” with two total strangers – the first was when I was ten, and I needed to go to the toilet. Dad was waiting out side for me, so in I went, locked the door and got on with it. When finished, I was pulling up my trousers when a note appeared from the cubicle next to me. It said “I would like to do that for you ”It was then I noticed the small hole in the wall and someone’s eye looking through it.
As you can guess, I rapidly got dressed, went outside and showed Dad the note – at which point, he went running in only to find the cubicle empty and four men washing their hands. As he had no evidence as to which was the pervert, he had to watch them leave.

Second time happened when I was 12and I had arranged to go to the pictures with a couple of friends. They didn’t show up, but I really wanted to see the film (Battle Of Britain) so I paid and went in. 30 minutes in, a guy came in and sat in the row behind me…..and a few minutes later, I felt his hand on my neck. I turned round, he said “Oops, sorry” and I got up and moved six rows down. 10 mintes later I felt two hands on the back of my neck and it was him again. This time I just got up and ran for my life…………..

Fast forward to last year when we found out that a supply teacher had been sending reading books (with messages in) to our eldest daughter aged 10. Nothing particularly weird, but things like “You read really well” and “I like hearing you read to the class”. Our daughter also really liked this teacher who was always complimenting her work at school.

We approached the school who brought in the police to hear our concerns. They all agreed that the comments etc, were “Odd” but in themselves they did not believe the intention was malevolent. However, they did speak with him and he left the school. All well and good, until our daughter told us that while outside our house, he had pulled up in his car and started talking to her. We reported this again to the Police, and all they said was that no offence had been committed, but they would keep an eye out for him.

Now, after my experiences and this happening with my daughter, I find myself really torn between being close to her every waking moment or on the other hand, finding out where this bloke lives and beating the life out of him. I find that I am thinking back to the two incidents I had, and wishing I was big enough then to rip their heads off. My daughters experience has brought it all back and I confess to being paranoid about where she is, who she is with, etc.
I don’t think I show it, but I hate how my incidents more than 45 years ago have managed to surface and affect me deeply today.

Yes - I'm sure that 99% of the time, I could leave my kids for 5 minutes and it wouldn't be a problem, but then I catch the younger one preparing to do something mental (yesterday, his paper plan got stuck on a shelf, and he was preparing for the climb of Mount Ikea...) and then I wonder...

sprout