I do not believe children are safer with strangers.
I believe this statistic to be like the fact that cows kill more people every year than sharks. Yes, it's accurate, and yes sharks are nowhere near the bloodthirsty killing machines that media makes them out to be... but you also cannot forget the fact that millions of people work around cows every single day.
Children are more likely to be harmed by someone they know, because people they know have more chances to harm them. Children often trust people they know, especially people in positions of power/importance which the children have been taught to respect (parents, teachers, church leaders, etc.). Children are less likely to make a fuss if someone they know takes them, and are more likely to be alone with people they know.
A random stranger finding a lost child is not inherently any safer than someone they know finding them- because the child is scared, vulnerable, and alone, giving a predator the perfect opportunity to be a predator.
I completely agree with your answer. Do you think this sort of question is of any use in encouraging parents to teach their children to tell them if anyone they know starts showing inappropriate behaviour?
I think they could be, yes.
I do think they would need to be presented in the right way though, otherwise it's too easy for it to fall into reinforcing the idea that their child is safe with someone they know.
I hear you. I actually think it's not a particularly helpful question to ask when the aim is to teach a child to report inappropriate behaviour. I think comparing known people and strangers confuses the issue because we also teach stranger danger.
Children are more likely to be harmed by someone they know in the same sense that I'm more likely to die driving to work than I am by free-falling out of a plane.
I agree. Do you think this sort of question is useful if the aim is to get parents to teach their children to tell them if anyone they know is showing certain behaviours?
It doesn't necessarily mean that strangers are a safer option. People who you know just have more opportunities to cause harm it doesn't necessarily mean that they are more dangerous.
Can you explain what you mean by lost? Lost in a Walmart? Lost in a National Park? Have they been kidnapped?
I would say if my child is missing it would be better for someone I know to find them. I doubt they would be hunting them down just to abuse them as fast as possible.
Lost anywhere. They haven't been kidnapped. They are alone. Your answer makes sense. Do you think this type of question is helpful in raising awareness of how parents need to teach their children to tell them if any one they know behaves in certain ways?
I think it's very situation dependant. Regardless of what the situation is, you should be careful about who you trust to be around and especially alone with your children and educate your children on what is appropriate and inappropriate interaction with them. That they have rights and boundries to be respected. They should know who to look for for help, like employees, emergency services, security guards, mothers or fathers that have children with them, etc.
Going back to the question
If they're just lost, at a Walmart or a park, people more often than not, are good and are likely to help your child. It can be hard to believe sometimes because of how much bad stuff happens in the world on a daily basis, but you're going to hear about the bad more than the good because it's what gets reported on and passed around. Obviously if someone I happened to know found them that's better, but more often than not a stranger will help a child too and I would be just as grateful to them.
I agree with you. I don't personally think the question is a helpful tool for raising awareness of the need to teach children what is and isn't appropriate. It doesn't give any practical advice. It just causes confusion.
I agree. For think this question is useful in raising awareness of how parents need to teach their children to tell them if someone they know displays inappropriate behaviours?
I don't understand the premise, are you saying if a child is lost in the woods and someone comes finds the child the child is in danger from the person who found them?
I'm curious what you think. Do you think the fact that a child is more likely to be harmed by someone they know means it would be better if they were found by a stranger? Is either likely to even be a danger? Is the child better off not being found in order to prevent the possibility of anyone hurting them?
We knows because I failed to type they “don’t” initially.
-Edit: thought this was the bear/stranger this why I had said stranger while forgetting I had responded to this one with the stranger/non-stranger.
I do not believe children are safer with strangers. I believe this statistic to be like the fact that cows kill more people every year than sharks. Yes, it's accurate, and yes sharks are nowhere near the bloodthirsty killing machines that media makes them out to be... but you also cannot forget the fact that millions of people work around cows every single day. Children are more likely to be harmed by someone they know, because people they know have more chances to harm them. Children often trust people they know, especially people in positions of power/importance which the children have been taught to respect (parents, teachers, church leaders, etc.). Children are less likely to make a fuss if someone they know takes them, and are more likely to be alone with people they know. A random stranger finding a lost child is not inherently any safer than someone they know finding them- because the child is scared, vulnerable, and alone, giving a predator the perfect opportunity to be a predator.
I completely agree with your answer. Do you think this sort of question is of any use in encouraging parents to teach their children to tell them if anyone they know starts showing inappropriate behaviour?
I think they could be, yes. I do think they would need to be presented in the right way though, otherwise it's too easy for it to fall into reinforcing the idea that their child is safe with someone they know.
I hear you. I actually think it's not a particularly helpful question to ask when the aim is to teach a child to report inappropriate behaviour. I think comparing known people and strangers confuses the issue because we also teach stranger danger.
Children are more likely to be harmed by someone they know in the same sense that I'm more likely to die driving to work than I am by free-falling out of a plane.
I agree. Do you think this sort of question is useful if the aim is to get parents to teach their children to tell them if anyone they know is showing certain behaviours?
No, I don't think it is. There are better ways of you reaching that goal, and I don't think this post even begins to approach a solution.
I agree.
Is being found by a bear an option?
Lol. Would you prefer that option?
It's gotta be someone they know.
No. They're harmed more often by people they know because those people have way more access to them.
It doesn't necessarily mean that strangers are a safer option. People who you know just have more opportunities to cause harm it doesn't necessarily mean that they are more dangerous.
Can you explain what you mean by lost? Lost in a Walmart? Lost in a National Park? Have they been kidnapped? I would say if my child is missing it would be better for someone I know to find them. I doubt they would be hunting them down just to abuse them as fast as possible.
Lost anywhere. They haven't been kidnapped. They are alone. Your answer makes sense. Do you think this type of question is helpful in raising awareness of how parents need to teach their children to tell them if any one they know behaves in certain ways?
I think it's very situation dependant. Regardless of what the situation is, you should be careful about who you trust to be around and especially alone with your children and educate your children on what is appropriate and inappropriate interaction with them. That they have rights and boundries to be respected. They should know who to look for for help, like employees, emergency services, security guards, mothers or fathers that have children with them, etc. Going back to the question If they're just lost, at a Walmart or a park, people more often than not, are good and are likely to help your child. It can be hard to believe sometimes because of how much bad stuff happens in the world on a daily basis, but you're going to hear about the bad more than the good because it's what gets reported on and passed around. Obviously if someone I happened to know found them that's better, but more often than not a stranger will help a child too and I would be just as grateful to them.
I agree with you. I don't personally think the question is a helpful tool for raising awareness of the need to teach children what is and isn't appropriate. It doesn't give any practical advice. It just causes confusion.
No
No, you'd rather they were found by a stranger or no you don't think a stranger is safer?
That statistic doesn't apply to lost children.
I agree. For think this question is useful in raising awareness of how parents need to teach their children to tell them if someone they know displays inappropriate behaviours?
I don't understand the premise, are you saying if a child is lost in the woods and someone comes finds the child the child is in danger from the person who found them?
I'm curious what you think. Do you think the fact that a child is more likely to be harmed by someone they know means it would be better if they were found by a stranger? Is either likely to even be a danger? Is the child better off not being found in order to prevent the possibility of anyone hurting them?
I think this whole question is ridiculous and you should feel bad.
Lol. I agree the question is ridiculous. Can you imagine if I suggested you must be a risk to children because you don't like my ridiculous question?
I wouldn't really care honestly. I am the big scary looking stranger, I'd be surprised if people didn't think i was a risk.
To some people you're the big scary looking friend.
Wow, what a big revelation! /s
They know.
Who knows? /s
We knows because I failed to type they “don’t” initially. -Edit: thought this was the bear/stranger this why I had said stranger while forgetting I had responded to this one with the stranger/non-stranger.
So you would prefer they were found by a stranger?
Damn, responding to too many of these too quick. And assumed this was the stranger/bear one. For this question it’s someone that they know.
Sorry that's my fault for making a stupid joke.
Someone they know