Beware of Perverts - Unfortunately, even at the happiest place on earth

[LilGMom]

Are these that same as a family bathroom? So my DH will be able to take the girls if he has to.

Yes, the family restrooms are the same as companion restrooms. You might have to wait for one to become available but in my opinion it is worth it.

 

[theresak]

I'm with you. I was smothered as as child and I turned out fine. I do not care if the chance is ALMOST impossible, it is still possible.

So was I. My mother respected the fact that the fears are real for far too many parents, and I wasn't going to be one of the statistics.
Neither will my boys.

 

[Andy B]

Yes, it is worse than it used to be. ALthough these things have always happened, with the internet, these sickos now have 24/7 extremely easy access to material that feeds their sickness and their desire. Also, someone who has been molested themselves, is likely to molest at an older age, so the multiplier factor is at work.

And I'm guessing that this 8 year old girls parents are wishing they had "smothered" their daughter.

I don't care what the odds of it happening are, even if it is 1 in 5,000,000,000, that 1 is NOT going to be my kid.

I do not have any proof that it is worse today if you have let us know. Each generation believes things are worse than when they were children but society continues.

 

[robinb]

I also want to add that I find comments to the effect of "I bet the mom of that little girl wished she was as over-protective as we are right now!" totally disgusting.

 

[Andy B]

I told my kids to go to someone at a cash register, or to a "Mommy." Women with kids are the absolute safest person to ask for help.

Really google 'Rose West'

 

[perdidochas]

Really google 'Rose West'

A rarity among the rare. Serial killers are rare, female serial killers are rarer.

 

[Andy B]

For all the people that say "we are smothering our children" "overprotective", etc, this is my question, what harm can be done to my children by me protecting them? I let them fight the battles that they can on their own, with peers, etc. but what damage is it going to do in the long run that I don't let my son use the mens room in WDW alone? Will he be a lesser adult? NO. However, I can think of damage that could be done if I let him use it alone. To me the people that think it is such low odds that it is more harm to protect them contantly than good, well, that just sounds like a parent trying to justify the fact that they are just too lazy to worry about it all the time.

I wonder if you are right about the non effects of smothering, we often hear of strange men being mommies boys themselves. I wonder what sigmund would have said?

 

[GOOFY4DONALD]

I wonder if you are right about the non effects of smothering, we often hear of strange men being mommies boys themselves. I wonder what sigmund would have said?

I do not want to venture way OT. If you look at some of the more infamous of the sicko 'mommie boys' you will see that their mother's weren't overprotective against people trying to hurt their boys. They were, for the most part, mentally unstable women that had a very unhealthy relationship with their boys. We are not talking about the same women that are on these boards just trying to protect their kids.

 

[CampbellScot]

good grief...what a terrible thing. That poor little girl. I think sometimes parents get a sense of being protected while at Disneyworld. Living in New Jersey has jaded me enough to know better!

I don't let my step kids out of my sight for even a second when we are out. This drives my 8 year old step daughter nuts and she frequently reminds me that she IS 8 afterall. I'll just smile as I fasten that kid leash in place...

 

[Family Fun Mom]

A while back I was watching FOX news and I believe Bill O'Reilly has a segment about this and WDW (actually all theme park places that attract kids). There are sickos that film little one year old dancing around and lifting their tops and dresses (just like all babies do) these sickos sell this online. So it doesn't matter if our kids are with us or not keep your eyes peeled. There was a recent arrest in my town of a guy and his wife in possession of child pornography. He said his favorite was filming the young dancers at local parades..(my daughter was in every local parade as a baton twirler) he would sell is films all over the world. I get just sick thinking that my daughter could be in one of his twisted movies.

I think I just threw up a little in my mouth. Sickening.

This thread is making my blood boil. It's also making ne nervous. My kids are getting older and wanting more independence. Finding the balance between protecting them and smothering them is very hard.

 

[Camicar]

It is almost impossible to grab both a kid and a bike simultaneously.

Seriously? It most certainly is possible to grab both a kid and a bike by getting the kid to let go of the bike. It's not hard. Put the kid in a head lock and cut off his air supply and he'll let go and he also won't be able to yell. Or break the kid's wrist and he'll let go of the bike. It doesn't take much effort to break the wrist of an 8 year old or a twelve year old if you're an adult male. A pedophile who is so desperate as to abduct a kid off of the street doesn't care if the kid's wrist is broken or if he had to break a few ribs to get that kid -- after all, he's not concerned about the kid's long term health, now is he?

My dd is not smothered. She is protected. And most of all, she is alive. As I said to her once, "My primary job -- even before loving you -- is to keep you safe. That is MY Job One. Everything else is secondary."

 

[BCDisneyFanatic]

For all the people that say "we are smothering our children" "overprotective", etc, this is my question, what harm can be done to my children by me protecting them? I let them fight the battles that they can on their own, with peers, etc. but what damage is it going to do in the long run that I don't let my son use the mens room in WDW alone? Will he be a lesser adult? NO. However, I can think of damage that could be done if I let him use it alone. To me the people that think it is such low odds that it is more harm to protect them contantly than good, well, that just sounds like a parent trying to justify the fact that they are just too lazy to worry about it all the time.

Don't you think that's a little harsh?


I certainly don't consider myself lazy in allowing my children a measure of freedom from constant surveillance. I believe, as a parent, I can monitor a situation and make reasonable assumptions of the risks involved.

That being said, I agree that WDW would not be the place to test this out. Certainly, if there are family washrooms nearby, this would be the optimum solution. However, for those that are agonizing over where their child is going to go to the washroom three months before they go on holiday, I don't think this is a particularly healthy attitude either.

I allow my child to ride a bike, despite the risks of her falling off and getting serious injuries. However, I mitigate these risks by making sure she wears a helmut, knows the rules of the road, only rides on very quiet streets or bike paths, etc. If I truly wanted to avoid all risks, she wouldn't be able to ride her bike at all. However, I don't think that that is in her best interests.

Every time I take my daughters in the car with me, I take the risk that we will be struck by a drunk driver. The risk of this occurring is much greater than the risk of my daughters getting kidnapped and murdered by a stranger in wal-mart (particularly when they are there together, holding hands). And yet, we still go out on the roads. I accept these risks because I think it is better for my children and I to go out into the world rather than stay home avoiding every potential risk.

I also feel that the value of children learning some measure of independence in reasonably controlled situations also outweighs what I perceive are the minimal risks.

It's not that I don't worry about these things - I am human after all, and trust me - despite comments on this board, I doubt that any parent could love their child any more than I love mine (certainly as much though ). However, I refuse to my life (and have my children live their lives) in constant fear. We are all aware of the risks, do what we can to minimize them within reason , and pray to a higher power that we manage to avoid what we can't control.

As a previous poster mentioned, parenting is about balance. Balancing the risks vs. developing a healthy sense of independence. While I can certainly see how parents can become obsessed with keeping their kids safe by avoiding all risk, I just tend to think that as a society, our risk-taking is all out of whack. The same parent that won't let their child go to the bathroom alone, may let their child ride in the front seat of the car, or feed them a high fat diet that may lead to serious health complications (certainly not referring to the OP, just in general!). None of us can avoid every risk in life.

To be honest, when I made my original post, I didn't really mean to stir up so much controversy. It's just that the seemingly constant posts about NEVER letting children out of parents' eyesight is a sad commentary on our perception of society as a whole.

 

[GreenMeanMachine]

Thanks for the article. You know on the one hand you think "oh its safe at Disney" but on the other, you know that is a logical place for those whackos to do their dirty work, so if the truth was known, those places may be even a little more dangerous than the everyday places like wal-mart or whatever.

It really boggles my mind how and why these sickos even exist. I mean what kind of mental defective is going to realize some type of pleasure from seeing a little kid, makes no sense to me, but I guess that's why they are sickos and I'm normal.

 

[ladyjayhawk]

I also feel that the value of children learning some measure of independence in reasonably controlled situations also outweighs what I perceive are the minimal risks.

How is leaving your children alone in Walmart a controlled situation?

 

[GOOFY4DONALD]

Seriously? It most certainly is possible to grab both a kid and a bike by getting the kid to let go of the bike. It's not hard. Put the kid in a head lock and cut off his air supply and he'll let go and he also won't be able to yell. Or break the kid's wrist and he'll let go of the bike. It doesn't take much effort to break the wrist of an 8 year old or a twelve year old if you're an adult male. A pedophile who is so desperate as to abduct a kid off of the street doesn't care if the kid's wrist is broken or if he had to break a few ribs to get that kid -- after all, he's not concerned about the kid's long term health, now is he?

My dd is not smothered. She is protected. And most of all, she is alive. As I said to her once, "My primary job -- even before loving you -- is to keep you safe. That is MY Job One. Everything else is secondary."

I have taken many courses on this subject by law enforcement. This is what I was told about the kids and bike issue. Although it is not impossible to separate a kid from their bike it is more difficult. If a child hold on to the bike for dear life while screaming it will cause a scene. This is the one thing that a predator does not want. They want the easy target. I was told to have my kids hold on to their bike at all costs. Even if they are hit. Any damage (broken bones) can be fixed. Once a child is in the car ..it is all over.

 

[BCDisneyFanatic]

When I am twenty feet away in a nearby aisle (within shouting distance), on a quiet shopping day (as in, the store isn't a madhouse) and my children are holding hands, together, and they are only out of my eyestight for a short period of time (less than five minutes...probably more like three), then yes, I feel like it is a REASONABLY controlled situation.

 

[perdidochas]

Seriously? It most certainly is possible to grab both a kid and a bike by getting the kid to let go of the bike. It's not hard. Put the kid in a head lock and cut off his air supply and he'll let go and he also won't be able to yell. Or break the kid's wrist and he'll let go of the bike. It doesn't take much effort to break the wrist of an 8 year old or a twelve year old if you're an adult male. A pedophile who is so desperate as to abduct a kid off of the street doesn't care if the kid's wrist is broken or if he had to break a few ribs to get that kid -- after all, he's not concerned about the kid's long term health, now is he?

Too much work for most pedophiles. Criminals go for weaker prey. If a kid resists too much, they will go to easier pickings. The snatching/abducting type pedophile doesn't happen much. The more common type seduces the child in.

My dd is not smothered. She is protected. And most of all, she is alive. As I said to her once, "My primary job -- even before loving you -- is to keep you safe. That is MY Job One. Everything else is secondary."

How long do you protect? Are you going to be a "helicopter mom" who hovers over their college age kids?

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=helicopter+mom

It's a tough thing to decide.

 

[perdidochas]

I have taken many courses on this subject by law enforcement. This is what I was told about the kids and bike issue. Although it is not impossible to separate a kid from their bike it is more difficult. If a child hold on to the bike for dear life while screaming it will cause a scene. This is the one thing that a predator does not want. They want the easy target. I was told to have my kids hold on to their bike at all costs. Even if they are hit. Any damage (broken bones) can be fixed. Once a child is in the car ..it is all over.

That's what I heard as well. In general, you can never stop a very determined criminal from doing anything. However, any kind of resistance makes it harder for a criminal, and most will give up and go to an easier target--that is the way of predators, they go after the weakest first.

 

[GreenMeanMachine]

How is leaving your children alone in Walmart a controlled situation?

Oh I didn't mean that you should EVER leave them alone, especially in wal-mart, just that predators may not totally "target" wal-mart like they may at disney or place where kids will be in abundance.

 

[theresak]

When I am twenty feet away in a nearby aisle (within shouting distance), on a quiet shopping day (as in, the store isn't a madhouse) and my children are holding hands, together, and they are only out of my eyestight for a short period of time (less than five minutes...probably more like three), then yes, I feel like it is a REASONABLY controlled situation.

The man I speak of molested children with parents in the very NEXT aisle.
Not nearly controlled. By the time a man could snatch one child, threaten the other and make it out the nearest exit before you notice he could be long gone before you could sound the alarm to get that store locked down.