Stranger Kidnapping

[Old Dominion Heather]

Here is an interesting article from a Kansas paper that takes a look at some child safety statistics. It also illustrates why I would not call the police on parents who left a child in a car for a few minutes.

 

http://www.kansascity.com/637/story/1372027.html

 

You would have to leave your child alone for 750,000 years, statistically, for them to be kidnapped.

[Old Dominion Heather]

Yeah, I don't think I'd leave the engine on. My guys would try to drive away.

[joannqn]

I don't care one bit about statistics.

 

Zina Linnik, age 12, was kidnapped by a stranger from the alley behind her home. She lived one mile from me. After he raped her, he killed her and dumped her body.

 

Yes, it was a two years ago, but I'll never forget it. I don't generally watch or read the news. We learned about it when we drove by her house on the way home from a doctor's appointment. My kids saw the memorial set up in front of her house and thought it was someone's birthday. When we got home a couple minutes later, I looked it up and explained to them what they really saw.

[Susu]

The thing about statistics is that they don't mean squat to the victim. My great-grandfather was killed by lightning. Not much chance of most of us being killed by lightning, but I am sure it was not much comfort to his wife and children... ;)

 

Susu

[Mabeline]

I don't care one bit about statistics.

 

QUOTE]

 

:iagree::iagree: Those statistic didn't make me feel better. If you figure you are in a big city with 10 million people, that means a lot of kids get kidnapped. I sure don't want my kids to be one of them. I live in a small town and last year there was a story about a girl who fought off a kidnapper and saved herself. Even in small towns with a lot less people have kidnapping happen. Also I think people being more careful and vigilant helps keep the numbers down. Even if it was one child a year I wouldn't want that child to be mine.

[BillieBoy]

Here is an interesting article from a Kansas paper that takes a look at some child safety statistics. It also illustrates why I would not call the police on parents who left a child in a car for a few minutes.

 

http://www.kansascity.com/637/story/1372027.html

 

You would have to leave your child alone for 750,000 years, statistically, for them to be kidnapped.

 

I understand your point as well as your justification for your comfort level. However people have different comfort levels.

 

I drive a lifted F350 diesel, my child is statistically safer than those in a Prius. Obviously the function and safety features are for my personal comfort levels more so than the if the Jones' think I'm not green. (I'll fight that tooth and nail, too :))

 

Increases in public school violence is close to the top of my reasons why I homeschool :) Does that make me paranoid or cautious? Probably a bit of both. Because some ones says it's not likely to affect my child, I'm still not playing the risk game.

 

When I confronted an ungrateful teen about leaving her child in a running car she sneered at me. I did not call the cops; I let it go realizing that this was her comfort level. It didn't stop me for having an overwhelming feeling of sympathy for that child. :)

[DarlaS]

The odds are about 1.5 in a million.

 

In a million what? A million kids left alone in cars, or a million kids period?

 

ETA: Read what this website says about stranger kidnapping:

 

http://www.klaaskids.org/pg-mc-mcstatistics.htm

 

So do you see how the odds could be much worse for a little girl left alone in a car or riding her bike alone?

Edited August 11, 2009 by darlasowders

[elegantlion]

We lived in Kansas City when Jake Robel was kidnapped after his mother went into a store to get him a drink. The events of that story were so disturbing that it made me physically ill. Here's a link but I'll warn you may not want to read. I've never left my child in a running car since.

 

My dh lost his father in a highly statistically improbable type of car accident. I wasn't about to open my family up to that even a one in a million chance.

Edited August 11, 2009 by elegantlion

[Blessedfamily]

It also just happened 2 or 3 weeks ago in Virginia Beach. Same story. People steal cars without realizing there's a child in the back. Now that is an occurence that seems to be on the rise.

[Old Dominion Heather]

Much of what is passing for information in the news is just fear-mongering. Yes, it is tragic that any child has EVER been kidnapped and hurt and killed, but I refuse to spend time obsessing about every possible kidnap scenario and refusing to allow my kids a reasonable amount of freedom, like sending my 10yo and his 4yo brother in to the store to pick up a pizza. Or letting my three boys play on the street out of sight.

 

Another article about the rise of fear mongering.

 

[I]Today Show Revises Number of Missing Kids Downwards

March 09, 2006

Maia Szalavitz

Yet claims numbers are increasing.

 

The Today show was at it again this week, trying to terrorize parents about “missing children.” In a concealed-camera segment which showed how easy it was for an adult man to get a little boy close enough to his car to abduct him, it used unsourced statistics that do not jibe with the best data available on the subject.

 

Today claimed that since 1982, there has been a 44% increase in the number of “missing children.” But according to the Justice Department, which tracks such data and is widely recognized as the best source for it, there has been no increase at all in these numbers, and in fact, there are signs of a decline between 1988 and 1999, the last year for which numbers are currently available.

 

As we noted here when Today covered the story in 2004, the show claimed that 58,000 American children go missing each year. That is the Justice Department statistic for what it calls “nonfamily abductions.”

 

But in such cases, as the media rarely notes, 90 percent of “abductees” return home within 24 hours. The vast majority are teenagers running away with friends or romantic partners and over 99 percent are returned alive and uninjured. (Although many teen girls are involved with sexual activity during the time when they are “missing,” the statistics do not distinguish between voluntary and coerced sex because if the girl is under-age and the male is not, she is not considered capable of consent. The majority of the “missing children” covered by this statistic (65%) are female and 59% are aged 15-17.)

 

This time, Today was more conservative in its estimate, claiming that only 5,000 children go missing each year. While this is an improvement over 58,000, the implication is still that there are 5,000 stereotypical kidnappings, in which a stranger or acquaintance abducts a child to hold for ransom or abuse and kill him or her. According to the Justice Department, there are only about 115 such incidents each year.

 

Parents have enough to worry about without such “stranger danger” hype.[/i]

Odds that an American kid will become obese: about 1 in 3.5 (according to the CDC: Rates of overweight and obesity remain high with 31.9% of children and adolescents aged 2 through 19 years at or above the 85th percentile of the 2000 BMI-for-age growth charts.)

 

Odds that a child will suffer from depession: 1 in 3 (according to http://www.raisinganoptimisticchild.com/statistics.html )

 

Odds that a child will be a victom of a stranger kidnapping: 1 in 1.5 million... I'd rather worry about the more likely scenarios.

Edited August 11, 2009 by Old Dominion Heather

[Old Dominion Heather]

Well no, but do you and your family worry every day about getting struck by lightening? Freak things do happen, but that doesn't mean that we should act like they are likely.

 

And I'm sorry about your grandad. Dh had a friend who was struck and killed by lightening while riding his bike home. Apparently, it is more common that stereotypical kidnappings!

[Laura Corin]

Odds that an American kid will become obese: about 1 in 3.5 (according to the CDC: Rates of overweight and obesity remain high with 31.9% of children and adolescents aged 2 through 19 years at or above the 85th percentile of the 2000 BMI-for-age growth charts.)

 

Odds that a child will suffer from depession: 1 in 3 (according to http://www.raisinganoptimisticchild.com/statistics.html )

 

Odds that a child will be a victom of a stranger kidnapping: 1 in 1.5 million... I'd rather worry about the more likely scenarios.

 

Laura

[JESSICAinMD]

In a million what? A million kids left alone in cars, or a million kids period?

 

ETA: Read what this website says about stranger kidnapping:

 

http://www.klaaskids.org/pg-mc-mcstatistics.htm

 

So do you see how the odds could be much worse for a little girl left alone in a car or riding her bike alone?

 

:iagree: The odds are probably increased for children left alone.

[Old Dominion Heather]

:iagree: The odds are probably increased for children left alone.

 

Increased to what amount, though? 1 in 500,000?

 

I'm sorry. That is still not likely enough to worry about.

[Tami]

I'll agree with you also, Heather.

 

Children are much more likely to die from Happy Meals and a sedentary lifestyle. Also, fussing, fearing and helicoptering only gives the illusion of safety. Even a Helicopter Mom is no match most men or anyone with a gun. I think the fear mongering only leads to anxious mothers with an illusion of perceived safety.

 

A real safety crisis in this country is obesity and malnutrition. I read recently that 70% of children are vitamin D deficient, for example, and that the projected obesity rates for children are staggering. Of course, nobody is proposing that we turn parents in for feeding their children a steady diet of French Fries and Chicken McYucks. :D

 

I try to go as "Free Range" as I can possibly tolerate. Have you seen the Free Range Kids website? The ideas are just CRAZY, and yet they resonate with me as the "free range" philosophies are reminiscent of the freedom I enjoyed as a child.

 

I wonder who else on the board is more "free range?"

[fshinkevich]

I'll agree with you also, Heather.

 

Children are much more likely to die from Happy Meals and a sedentary lifestyle. Also, fussing, fearing and helicoptering only gives the illusion of safety. Even a Helicopter Mom is no match most men or anyone with a gun. I think the fear mongering only leads to anxious mothers with an illusion of perceived safety.

 

A real safety crisis in this country is obesity and malnutrition. I read recently that 70% of children are vitamin D deficient, for example, and that the projected obesity rates for children are staggering. Of course, nobody is proposing that we turn parents in for feeding their children a steady diet of French Fries and Chicken McYucks. :D

 

I try to go as "Free Range" as I can possibly tolerate. Have you seen the Free Range Kids website? The ideas are just CRAZY, and yet they resonate with me as the "free range" philosophies are reminiscent of the freedom I enjoyed as a child.

 

I wonder who else on the board is more "free range?"

 

I am - I do all sorts of shocking things, like let my kids play out front, ride their bikes around the neighborhood, walk to the store alone, hang out at the library with their friends and (horror of horrors) leave them in the car while I run the cart back to the corral :D

[Old Dominion Heather]

Well, if it isn't already obvious, I am. I have really enjoyed the Free-Range Kids site. It is great to put things into perspective!

[Laura Corin]

Well, if it isn't already obvious, I am. I have really enjoyed the Free-Range Kids site. It is great to put things into perspective!

 

The woods are across a field from our house, and mobile phones don't work in this valley. We tell them when to be home and let them go. On the other hand, I am careful with Hobbes around traffic - he doesn't concentrate well, so this is a real danger. Calvin is free to come and go whenever and wherever he likes - I drop him at Taekwondo then he walks (after dark) to scouts, after which I pick him back up.

 

Laura

Edited August 11, 2009 by Laura Corin

[Caitilin]

I'll agree with you also, Heather.

 

Children are much more likely to die from Happy Meals and a sedentary lifestyle. Also, fussing, fearing and helicoptering only gives the illusion of safety. Even a Helicopter Mom is no match most men or anyone with a gun. I think the fear mongering only leads to anxious mothers with an illusion of perceived safety.

 

A real safety crisis in this country is obesity and malnutrition. I read recently that 70% of children are vitamin D deficient, for example, and that the projected obesity rates for children are staggering. Of course, nobody is proposing that we turn parents in for feeding their children a steady diet of French Fries and Chicken McYucks. :D

 

I try to go as "Free Range" as I can possibly tolerate. Have you seen the Free Range Kids website? The ideas are just CRAZY, and yet they resonate with me as the "free range" philosophies are reminiscent of the freedom I enjoyed as a child.

 

I wonder who else on the board is more "free range?"

 

 

Working on being more Free-Range here, too. It helps that we live in a rural area, but I think(hope?) that I would strive for it anyway. :D

[DarlaS]

How is letting kids play in the woods even close to leaving them in a parked car in public? In the woods, you need only to trust your kids. In public, you've got to trust everyone else (if only not to call the police on you!). Creeps don't go looking for kids in the woods. It's much easier finding unattended children in cars. Give them a compass and let 'em go. Mine even know how to use that compass (and which weeds are edible :D) so if you're going to call someone a "helicopter mom" look elsewhere.

 

I grew up on 80 acres, played out of sight of my parents almost ALL of the time and I do not recall my mom leaving me alone in a parked car (occasionally with an older sibling). This is in rural Michigan in the 70's.

 

My kids play out of my sight all the time. However, I happen to know that there are twenty registered s*x offenders within 6 miles of me (seven of those committed an offense against a child) in my small town of about 3,000. Going to town is when I choose to be alert. I'm sure they go all the same places I do. There's only one grocery store and one post office after all.

[Dirtroad]

Statistics don't matter until someone wants to make a LAW about it.:blink: Then, your just hear them rattled and rattled.

 

Common sense should prevail. Teaching caution & awareness.... but this country is reaching a level closer to paranoia. Our kids stay inside or have a parent with them every step now... they are fat, soft, and lack for adventure. They know more about fantasy & cyber worlds than the one they actually do live in!

 

My FIL grew up in the Great Depression. He talks of perverts, peeping Toms, missing kids, abusive relatives, illegitimate children.... doesn't sound any different than today.... Ah, but we have 24 hour news & hear about stories in Podunk, Alabama and get worried about our litlte Podunk, Montana.

 

We have elite academic types with no children (or scary children sometimes) telling us how to be better parents based upon THEIR statistics & research.... and we have neighbors with so few problems in their own lives... they MUST meddle in ours.:thumbdown: (Local Mom arrested for leaving 12 yr old, 8 yr old & 2 yr old in car on a relatively nice weather day... kids bought a soda & returned to the car before some do-gooder woman called the cops.. the Mom had only run inside to get a refund... a bit overboard & meddling!!)

 

Wicked behavior will always be. I am careful b/c of it... but I have to refuse (& fight) being paranoid or fearful. The article is about common sense & resisting the FEAR that seems to be gripping parents. Makes complete sense to me... good read!

 

Our kids are going to still be living at home when they turn 40 b/c we are too fearful to begin teaching independance & discernment.

[Joker]

I've seen this type of thread come up time and time again. I grew up "free range", I guess. We lived on farms and were out all day, out of sight of our parents. Today I asked my mom if she had the news coverage and the 24 hour media that we do today, would she have done anything different? Her answer - absolutely! She would not have allowed us to do most of the things we did and would have kept us closer. When I was 9 something happened to me they still don't know about - so I wish they had kept me closer. I choose to parent a little different than they did and I keep my 2 dd's a little closer.

[LibraryLover]

Well no, but do you and your family worry every day about getting struck by lightening? Freak things do happen, but that doesn't mean that we should act like they are likely.

 

And I'm sorry about your grandad. Dh had a friend who was struck and killed by lightening while riding his bike home. Apparently, it is more common that stereotypical kidnappings!

 

 

I'm with you, Heather.

 

A child has a greater chance of being struck by lightening, and that's the absolute reality.

 

Sitting in a parked car is less dangerous than driving in a car with your parents. It is what it is, although you won't likely make friends with these facts.

 

PS I am going to send you a Friend request. lol

[LibraryLover]

I am - I do all sorts of shocking things, like let my kids play out front, ride their bikes around the neighborhood, walk to the store alone, hang out at the library with their friends and (horror of horrors) leave them in the car while I run the cart back to the corral :D

 

 

Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo! That's crazy talk! :D

 

I actually moved to a community where walking and biking is common. :tongue_smilie:

[Laura Corin]

How is letting kids play in the woods even close to leaving them in a parked car in public?

 

 

Scotland has right to roam legislation - we can go onto anyone's land so long as we don't do damage. So anyone could be in those woods.

 

Laura

[Osmosis Mom]

I don't care one bit about statistics.

 

QUOTE]

 

:iagree::iagree: Those statistic didn't make me feel better. If you figure you are in a big city with 10 million people, that means a lot of kids get kidnapped. I sure don't want my kids to be one of them. I live in a small town and last year there was a story about a girl who fought off a kidnapper and saved herself. Even in small towns with a lot less people have kidnapping happen. Also I think people being more careful and vigilant helps keep the numbers down. Even if it was one child a year I wouldn't want that child to be mine.

 

Exactly. Kids get snatched from the front-yard. You might have experienced a slow-moving car in front of your house... People are sick and creepy. Couldn't give much about statistics...

[Blessedfamily]

....

 

I grew up on 80 acres, played out of sight of my parents almost ALL of the time and I do not recall my mom leaving me alone in a parked car (occasionally with an older sibling). This is in rural Michigan in the 70's.

 

My kids play out of my sight all the time. .....

 

I agree. It's a big jump to assume that just because someone said they wouldn't leave their 2-4 yo in a parked car alone means their children have no freedom. (That was the age in the OP of the original thread)

 

Car gets stolen A LOT. I think a child playing, even alone, in their own yard is safer than that.

 

Yes, this subject has come up before. Some people vocally allow their children freedom, but still have certain limits to what they feel is safe.

Edited August 12, 2009 by Blessedfamily
spelling

[Renee in NC]

Statistics don't matter until someone wants to make a LAW about it.:blink: Then, your just hear them rattled and rattled.

 

Common sense should prevail. Teaching caution & awareness.... but this country is reaching a level closer to paranoia. Our kids stay inside or have a parent with them every step now... they are fat, soft, and lack for adventure. They know more about fantasy & cyber worlds than the one they actually do live in!

 

My FIL grew up in the Great Depression. He talks of perverts, peeping Toms, missing kids, abusive relatives, illegitimate children.... doesn't sound any different than today.... Ah, but we have 24 hour news & hear about stories in Podunk, Alabama and get worried about our litlte Podunk, Montana.

 

We have elite academic types with no children (or scary children sometimes) telling us how to be better parents based upon THEIR statistics & research.... and we have neighbors with so few problems in their own lives... they MUST meddle in ours.:thumbdown: (Local Mom arrested for leaving 12 yr old, 8 yr old & 2 yr old in car on a relatively nice weather day... kids bought a soda & returned to the car before some do-gooder woman called the cops.. the Mom had only run inside to get a refund... a bit overboard & meddling!!)

 

Wicked behavior will always be. I am careful b/c of it... but I have to refuse (& fight) being paranoid or fearful. The article is about common sense & resisting the FEAR that seems to be gripping parents. Makes complete sense to me... good read!

 

Our kids are going to still be living at home when they turn 40 b/c we are too fearful to begin teaching independance & discernment.

 

:iagree:

[Renee in NC]

I agree. It's a big jump to assume that just because someone said they wouldn't leave their 2-4 yo in a parked car alone means their children have no freedom. (That was the age in the OP of the original thread)

 

Car gets stolen A LOT. I think a child playing, even alone, in their own yard is safer than that.

 

Yes, this subject has come up before. Some people vocally allow their children freedom, but still have certain limits to what they feel is safe.

 

That's true. I wouldn't leave my 2-4yo in a parked car, but I do *many* of the other things listed on this board as dangerous and irresponsible. However, I won't let my dc go into other people's houses unless I know them very, very well. Chidlren are MUCH more likely to be in danger at the home of a friend, relative, or aquaintance. Stranger abductions/molestations are very, very rare.

[Old Dominion Heather]

That is absolutely true. I don't worry about leaving them alone for a minute or two or sendning them in a business without me. I am more careful about not leaving them with people that THEY are not comfortable with. And they are not allowed to go into anyone else's house without permission... unless it is an emergency.

[katilac]

Scotland has right to roam legislation - we can go onto anyone's land so long as we don't do damage. So anyone could be in those woods.

 

Laura

 

//brief hijack//

 

Really?? That's so strange to me. We have some land in the country (here in the states), and that idea would astonish people. No way do you go on someone's property without their permission, and you aren't going to ask someone you don't know well.

 

What if the property is fenced? Can you walk past a gate? Do owners fuss about roamers leaving behind trash and what-not, or is it just not a big deal?

[sheryl]

I don't care one bit about statistics.

 

Zina Linnik, age 12, was kidnapped by a stranger from the alley behind her home. She lived one mile from me. After he raped her, he killed her and dumped her body.

 

Yes, it was a two years ago, but I'll never forget it. I don't generally watch or read the news. We learned about it when we drove by her house on the way home from a doctor's appointment. My kids saw the memorial set up in front of her house and thought it was someone's birthday. When we got home a couple minutes later, I looked it up and explained to them what they really saw.

 

 

:iagree:

[Susu]

Just wanted to clarify...it was not my grandad that was struck and killed by lightning, but great grandad... I didn't even know him since he was long gone by the time I was born...

 

And I read somewhere that being struck by lightning is more common that we realize...but many people actually survive it.

 

My point was though, that statistics mean nothing if you are one of the "rare" exceptions. You might have a million to one chance of winning the lottery, but if you are that ONE, then you'd be "one in a million" :)

 

Though I don't worry about being struck by lightning, I don't stand out in an empty field during a lightning storm. I don't constantly worry about my kids being harmed by others, but I do protect them in a way that I consider common sense. Though I don't think the chances are very high that they would be abducted, I still don't leave them in a car alone while I shop.

 

Besides, statistics can be misleading. The chances of the average person getting struck by lightning is pretty low. But among people who live in Kansas and spend their days working on cherry pickers at the top of electric polls during the summer months...well, the statistics would be drastically different for them. So, I would assume that children being abducted in general is rare, but children consistently left unsupervised in high crime areas would likely be a different story! You have to compare apples to apples...

 

So, like most parents, i have to calculate the risks/benefits in any situation with my children. Most good parents calculate that the benefit of a certain behavior (like giving their children more autonomy and freedom) out weighs the risks of harm in any given situation. The parent just makes the best decision he or she can in the situation. So my good friend allowed her toddler free range in a house full of "dangerous" knick knacks, while I put them away. There were advantages and disadvantages to either approach, and both our children grew up (relatively) unscathed and functioning. We just each came to different conclusions based on our own pasts and the personalities of our children...

 

Susu

[AndyJoy]

I am grateful to my mom that she wasn't overly afraid for my safety as a child, considering that a stranger ACTUALLY TRIED to kidnap my sister when she was 4 1/2 and I was 6. By the grace of God, I was able to thwart it. I think that had my mom reacted too strongly in front of me or severely limited our freedom, we would have been more negatively impacted by this event. As it is, my sister doesn't even remember it.

 

Though we never went to that park alone again, my mom still let us ride our bikes in our cul-de-sac. At 6 & 8 we were allowed to roam a 3 block radius in our neighborhood for several hours before checking in. By the time I was 10, we were riding our bikes to the pool & convenience store alone, riding or walking 3/4 mi. to school, hanging out at the park or library after school, etc. I hope to be able to give my kids similar freedoms.

 

I do not, however, plan to to leave my kids in running car. Not so much because of fears of abduction, but because of fears that they will put the car in gear! I've personally known 3 families that have had a 3-5 year old do this! One smashed through the door of a garage "art studio" where kids where kids were taking lessons. Fortunately no one was hurt, but several kids could have died that day.

Edited August 12, 2009 by AndyJoy

[Laura Corin]

//brief hijack//

 

Really?? That's so strange to me. We have some land in the country (here in the states), and that idea would astonish people. No way do you go on someone's property without their permission, and you aren't going to ask someone you don't know well.

 

What if the property is fenced? Can you walk past a gate? Do owners fuss about roamers leaving behind trash and what-not, or is it just not a big deal?

 

So if land is laid to lawn or flower bed, then you can't go through (unless there's an ancient right of way across it, in which case people can use that too). Otherwise farmland, woodland, whatever can all be walked on. There is a code of conduct to protect the land, livestock and walkers, but basically you can go where you like - climbing over gates if necessary. We have three acres, of which two would probably be legally available to other people.

 

If you think of the different histories of the UK and the US, that explains a lot. The UK has been in continuous settled habitation for thousands of years, since a time when almost everyone walked as their only means of transportation. It didn't make sense to have roads or paths that went the long way round - you just cut across the neighbour's land. The US has a different history, with a different attitude to property. Americans who come and live in the UK are often caught out by this: here's Madonna falling foul of the slightly different English legislation.

 

I don't actually know who owns the woods where my boys play.

 

Laura

[aggieamy]

Thanks for posting that Heather. I agree with you completely. I wouldn't leave my infant in the car with the keys in the ignition and the doors unlocked. However, I feel perfectly fine leaving my five year old in my locked, difficult to steal vehicle with out any keys for two minutes. If someone really wanted to take her then they'd be able to get her. They'd have to break the window in a well lit area, reach in, unbuckle her, all while she's probably making a scene. Of course, if they wanted her that badly they could wait until I got back to the car with the keys, knock my 115 pound self down and carjack me too. There's some real creeps out there and I do my best to protect my kids but sometimes you also have to be practical.

 

Yeah, I understand the argument that you wouldn't leave a laptop on the seat of your car why leave a kid? There are way more people out there that would steal a laptop than would take a kid.