Online Predators--Media Myth V. Frightening Reality

danah boyd has a great post today on a subject that really scares metoo--stalking devices sold to parents so they can basically "stalk"their kids, keep them under surveillance all the time, protect themagainst internet predators. Protecting our kids is important . . . butas it's not the internet we need to be worryingabout but the family members and family friends and trusted advisorsclose by. (www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2007/06/13/let_the_stalkin.html) Given the likelihood of abuse happening from someone the child knows and trusts--versus a stranger over the internet--what is important is teaching our kids to trust their instincts and develop social skills so they can deal with and do everything in their power to stop (or report) someone who is using psychological manipulation (the sick mixed-up talk of love and danger that abusers use when they threaten children into silence). Parental surveillance is the opposite of what kids need in order to thrive not only as kids but in their adult lives as well.

danah's post sites Pete Reilly's January 2007 "Facts about Childhood Sexual Abuse and Schools" 2007 (www.districtadministration.com/pulse/commentpost.aspx?news=no&postid=18080). Reilly notes that "Four (4) percent of all youth Internet users in 2005 said onlinesolicitors asked them for nude or sexually explicit photographs ofthemselves.(Online Victimization of Youth: Five Years Later. 2006. National Centerfor Missing & Exploited Children, Crimes Against Children ResearchCenter, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. December4, 2006).

But the good news is that ALL forms of child sexual abuse are declining steadily. Here's Reilly's chart:

The official birthdate of the commercialized internet is 1991; these stats start in 1990. If you believed all the hype in the media about Facebook or MySpace (as if these places exist to abuse children), you would expect a rise in sexual abuse data as precipitous as this one. You might expect a steady line. But a 40% decline? What does this mean? I have no idea but I want to understand more about this.

Perhaps all the talk about predators in the media has had the effect of making children and their loved ones more aware of predation . . . and made those close to them more fearful of exposure. That doesn't sound plausible to me and I want to think about these statistics a little longer to try to make sense of them. But in the meantime, again from Pete Reilly, here are the statistics we should all be worried about: 95% of child and sexual abuse is perpetrated by family members. 95%. 95%. 95%. (Do I need to write that again?) The breakdown within that horrific number: 79% ofperpetrators are parents. Other relatives accounted for 7% andunmarried partners of parents and ?other? accounted for 4% and 5% ofabuse. Here's a piechart from Reilly so you can see predators in perspective:

Even the statistics on "other professionals"--the oft-maligned child care providers, teachers (other professionals), ministers, priests, are below one percent. And it is educators who are the group most likely (and this includes the figures for parents) to spot the signs of abuse and report it.

The actual figures for internet predation are not yet clear yet but Reilly has another one worth noting: of the sexual abuse perpetrated by those who use the internet for that purpose, 79% of the actual abuse happened at the child's home. Proximity again. Parents should be less concerned about the internet--and not investing in blackberry systems that allow you to monitor your children's texting or in systems (I've written about this before) in schools that allow you to see how long your child's bathroom break lasted--but paying attention to what is happening in their own homes.