UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: Cariad on September 29, 2013, 06:15:04 PM
-
The risk of any child being abducted is minuscule. The risk of a child chocking/ being electrocuted/ dying in a fire/suffocating is certainty increased if they are left alone though. This isn't the message people have received from this case though.
I read a book a couple of years ago (which I can't find right now, so can't quote correctly) about risk. It was estimated that in the year following the 9/11 bombings more people were killed in extra car crashes than in the original event because they were afraid to fly.
Increasing fear of abduction isn't helpful. Peoples fear of stranger danger is just irrational.
-
The sense of security was real, they were right to feel secure. It's a pity parents should fear abduction from bed, the risk of a domestic accident is far greater.
It would be necessary to compare the ratio real/false abductions by strangers before and after before stating the McCann case had positive effect on parents.
-
The sense of security was real, they were right to feel secure. It's a pity parents should fear abduction from bed, the risk of a domestic accident is far greater.
It would be necessary to compare the ratio real/false abductions by strangers before and after before stating the McCann case had positive effect on parents.
We have actually been through this at length and the chances of a fatal accident in an apt with no stairs are incredibly small. Certainly it has had an effect on MARK Warner who no longer PROMOTE a baby listening service in any of their resorts
-
The risk of any child being abducted is minuscule. The risk of a child chocking/ being electrocuted/ dying in a fire/suffocating is certainty increased if they are left alone though. This isn't the message people have received from this case though.
I read a book a couple of years ago (which I can't find right now, so can't quote correctly) about risk. It was estimated that in the year following the 9/11 bombings more people were killed in extra car crashes than in the original event because they were afraid to fly.
Increasing fear of abduction isn't helpful. Peoples fear of stranger danger is just irrational.
Yes, it is true, Cariad - and welcome to the forum, by the way - that the risk of a child being abducted is minuscule, and that the rate of accidents in the home and elsewhere is sadly very high.
The fear that parents have of losing their children to a stranger is an irrational one, totally out of proportion to the actual risk of abduction. But it is a deeply-held fear nonetheless, one which the Madeleine case taps into. I believe that many parents will have exercised a much greater degree of caution with their children, in general terms, because of this and other abduction cases, one of the results being that children will have been much less likely to have been left on their own and vulnerable to all kinds of accidents. So in that sense I think there is a connection.
My mind turns to a serious case that occurred two years ago in the community in America in which I am currently living. A child a few hundred metres away from my home went missing, and, due to the detective work and diligence of community members, was found approximately 36 hours later, unfortunately dead and dismembered, some of his remains stored in the freezer of his abductor and killer, and other remains in rubbish bins nearby.
It was a horrific case that shocked the whole community, if not the whole of New York, and immediately had the effect of parents being more diligent with their children in all sorts of ways: volunteer organisations were formed in the neghbourhood to escort children walking home from school; stricter laws on CCTV across the state were passed in the courts (the boy had been found thanks to the CCTV footage of various local business owners); local shops and organisations joined a 'safe haven' scheme, placing notices in their windows for children indicating a safe place of refuge and help should they become detached from their parents; schools instituted new safety rules and were more diligent in criminal background checking for teachers; community organisations staged events where police and other community officials spoke to parents to give advice on child safety- not just outside the home but inside too... and so on.
Some of these things were directly related to the abduction/murder case; others not. The point is that the sorry case as a whole sent out ripples that changed parental awareness; not only awareness of danger itself, but a heightened sense of how fortunate we are to have our children safe and well - helping to promote better parenting in general.
I was at home looking after my two month old baby at the time, and remember being even more caring with him than usual , feeling even more grateful than before to have a healthy baby. Many local parents spoke about being so affected; many responded very emotionally. Counselling was organised by the city for both parents and children who had been traumatised or affected by the event.
All of the above being strictly speaking irrational, because the likelihood of such an event happening again in the same place is obviously tiny. The killer was a loner who is now serving a life sentence and will not be able to strike again. But at the same time, the abduction prompted us all to be kinder and more appreciative, and more diligent in general terms.
-
The sense of security was real, they were right to feel secure. It's a pity parents should fear abduction from bed, the risk of a domestic accident is far greater.
It would be necessary to compare the ratio real/false abductions by strangers before and after before stating the McCann case had positive effect on parents.
It's not so scientific, Anne, I admit.
But the reality is that the world is becoming a more and more dangerous place for children and we are having to sharpen up accordingly.
-
the reason for fatal accidents with children in the home are extremely small and are almost exclusively related to stairs. no stairs in the appt
-
the reason for fatal accidents with children in the home are extremely small and are almost exclusively related to stairs. no stairs in the appt
there was outside of it
-
there was outside of it
Absolutely, I have considered that but if Maddie had fallen outside someone would have seen or heard her. there would also have been blood on the stairs
-
The Internet ate my post!!
The gist of it was that although I worry that we're instilling unnecessary fears into our children, having read your post I have to agree with you that there is a greater good served by heightened vigilance.
I think you are sadly wrong. You have quoted an abduction case, could you, or anyone else quote a fatal accident in the home that did not involve fire. I think you will struggle. the home is a dangerous place for accidents, but not for fatal accidents
-
I think you are sadly wrong. You have quoted an abduction case, could you, or anyone else quote a fatal accident in the home that did not involve fire. I think you will struggle. the home is a dangerous place for accidents, but not for fatal accidents
Yes, I read this today actually:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-gloucestershire-24318197
Should I Google "fatal accidents in the home" I'm sure there'd be thousands of hits.
-
Yes, I read this today actually:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-gloucestershire-24318197
Should I Google "fatal accidents in the home" I'm sure there'd be thousands of hits.
probably would have been better if you had googled it first then you wouldn't have made such a fool of yoursel
-
Yes, I read this today actually:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-gloucestershire-24318197
Should I Google "fatal accidents in the home" I'm sure there'd be thousands of hits.
What do you make of the Pontins/Butlins system of a nanny cycling up and down, Cariad? Would you condemn parents for that?
PS) Sorry for my rubbish Welsh in the other thread, I used to get Welsh telly on my old portable and watched "Scorio!!"
-
probably would have been better if you had googled it first then you wouldn't have made such a fool of yoursel
I don't understand? You asked me to supply an example of a fatal accident in the home, I did so. If I have made a fool of myself, could you please enlighten me as to how, so I can avoid making the same mistake again.
-
I don't understand? You asked me to supply an example of a fatal accident in the home, I did so. If I have made a fool of myself, could you please enlighten me as to how, so I can avoid making the same mistake again.
you have managed to supply one example, not the thousand hits from google that you expected, fatal accidents in the home, not involving stairs or fires are incredibly rare. Stranger abduction from the home is almost certainly more common
-
What do you make of the Pontins/Butlins system of a nanny cycling up and down, Cariad? Would you condemn parents fot that?
PS) Sorry for my rubbish Welsh in the other thread, I used to get Welsh telly on my old portable and watched "Scorio!!
Don't apologise! Seriously, no one ever tries, I'm really pleased that you did.
Personally I wouldn't take advantage of such a service. I've thought about this a lot, and I can't think of a single time I left my children out of ear shot at that age. I have two and there's 22 months between them. When they were babies I'd have them strapped to me in their sling, when they were older they'd be toddling around with me. If they were asleep in bed, we'd have the doors open and the baby alarm with us.
We have a shop on the corner of our street that is a comparable distance to the tapas bar from the apartment. On many an occasion I'd realise that I'd run out of something needed for the morning. I never left them. Never. Not for the 3 minutes it would take to grab a pint of milk.
Condemn is a strong word though. I think it's more a case of not comprehending someone else's actions. The idea of leaving small children is just alien to me. I'm more baffled by it than outraged.
-
Don't apologise! Seriously, no one ever tries, I'm really pleased that you did.
Personally I wouldn't take advantage of such a service. I've thought about this a lot, and I can't think of a single time I left my children out of ear shot at that age. I have two and there's 22 months between them. When they were babies I'd have them strapped to me in their sling, when they were older they'd be toddling around with me. If they were asleep in bed, we'd have the doors open and the baby alarm with us.
We have a shop on the corner of our street that is a comparable distance to the tapas bar from the apartment. On many an occasion I'd realise that I'd run out of something needed for the morning. I never left them. Never. Not for the 3 minutes it would take to grab a pint of milk.
Condemn is a strong word though. I think it's more a case of not comprehending someone else's actions. The idea of leaving small children is just alien to me. I'm more baffled by it than outraged.
Fair enough and thanks for your opinions. I wouldn't have done what Kate and Gerry did, but the way that some people use it as a stick to beat them with year after year after year, compounding their pain, is not on IMO.
-
you have managed to supply one example, not the thousand hits from google that you expected, fatal accidents in the home, not involving stairs or fires are incredibly rare. Stranger abduction from the home is almost certainly more common
I suppose you have somethng to back this claim up? I find it extremely hard to believe, lets say in the UK for arguments sake, that more children have been adbucted by a stranger from their home than have died as a result of choking, poisoning, drowning, falling out of a window/balcony, strangulation or suffocation and other lesser common fatal accidents, many of which are on the news frequently, in fact I dont believe it at all.
Unless you can prove it....wont hold my breath
-
you have managed to supply one example, not the thousand hits from google that you expected, fatal accidents in the home, not involving stairs or fires are incredibly rare. Stranger abduction from the home is almost certainly more common
You asked for a single example of a fatal accident in the home, which I was able to do without consulting Google as it had been on the news today.
I followed your instructions to the letter, you then tell me I'm making a fool of myself. I still don't get it.
Anyway, here's the statistics:
Every year there are approximately 4000 deaths as the result of a home accident. Around 120 of these are below 15 years and 1300 over 75
http://www.rospa.com/homesafety/adviceandinformation/general/facts-figures.aspx
The number of sucsessfull stranger abductions is 68.
http://tna.europarchive.org/20081023123012/homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/r225.pdf
I can't find anything about the number of stranger abductions from the home, so the figures aren't quite like for like.
The accident figures are from 2002 and the abductions from 2002/3 they were the best set of data, if not the most recent.
They're all both from the uk.
Fatal accidents for children under the age of 15 =120
Successful stranger abductions =68.
I'm not going to suggest that you should have Googled it yourself before making your claim to avoid making a fool of yourself though, cause that's just mean!
-
You asked for a single example of a fatal accident in the home, which I was able to do without consulting Google as it had been on the news today.
I followed your instructions to the letter, you then tell me I'm making a fool of myself. I still don't get it.
Anyway, here's the statistics:
Every year there are approximately 4000 deaths as the result of a home accident. Around 120 of these are below 15 years and 1300 over 75
http://www.rospa.com/homesafety/adviceandinformation/general/facts-figures.aspx
The number of sucsessfull stranger abductions is 68.
http://tna.europarchive.org/20081023123012/homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/r225.pdf
I can't find anything about the number of stranger abductions from the home, so the figures aren't quite like for like.
The accident figures are from 2002 and the abductions from 2002/3 they were the best set of data, if not the most recent.
They're all both from the uk.
Fatal accidents for children under the age of 15 =120
Successful stranger abductions =68.
I'm not going to suggest that you should have Googled it yourself before making your claim to avoid making a fool of yourself though, cause that's just mean!
CPN also sent informative links. But there are no stats about children abducted by strangers from bed. May be there's none.
-
Bump for Davel in case he didnt see the last three posts, in your own time thank you in advance
-
CPN also sent informative links. But there are no stats about children abducted by strangers from bed. May be there's none.
I did indeed give much the same links on the thread "The breathtaking hypocrisy of those that support the McCanns" but they did not satisfy davel - mind you I don't see much that does satisfy him!
The accident figures for young children are the main reason why the NSPCC and government guidelines say that babies and toddlers should never be left alone, not the possibility of abduction which is relatively rare. And the reason why it is felt that the McCanns, as doctors, should have known better is, IMO, because they should be aware of this through their training, let alone the likelihood of a GP experiencing this through his/her practice. And add in the fact that a GP would be expected to report to the authorities any family they knew of leaving children in this way, and would be expected to attend subsequent case conferences. So the likelihood of the McCanns not knowing this is considerably less that the likelihood of many other parents not knowing this (although common sense should tell you not to leave such young children out of sight and hearing anyway, and especially when you know they have cried for you the night before)
-
I think you are sadly wrong. You have quoted an abduction case, could you, or anyone else quote a fatal accident in the home that did not involve fire. I think you will struggle. the home is a dangerous place for accidents, but not for fatal accidents
Yes - drowning.
A neighbour of mine lost her one year old child who drowned having fallen head first into the toilet while the mother was in the basement attending to laundry.
I don't know how common that is, but the risk is certainly high enough for most parents to keep their bathroom and toilet doors shut while the children are very small, even when the parents are close by.
Choking is another example. I know of someone whose child choked on a grape - never give whole grapes to children being another basic rule, as we know - and the child died.
Anecdotal I know, but these are common worries that parents have, not for no reason.
-
Yes - drowning.
A neighbour of mine lost her one year old child who drowned having fallen head first into the toilet while the mother was in the basement attending to laundry.
I don't know how common that is, but the risk is certainly high enough for most parents to keep their bathroom and toilet doors shut while the children are very small, even when the parents are close by.
Choking is another example. I know of someone whose child choked on a grape - never give whole grapes to children being another basic rule, as we know - and the child died.
Anecdotal I know, but these are common worries that parents have, not for no reason.
I agree Sherlock, IIRC around 6 children a year drown in the bath because their parent(s) left them briefly for a number of reasons. These are indeed very rare tragedies, but although a case for neglect on the part of the parents can undoubtedly be made, it never is, because we all recognise that there is no such thing as a perfect parent and so have nothing but extreme sympathy for these people. Unless their name is McCann of course, who for some inexplicable reason are actually expected to be perfect parents and are not allowed to exhibit the human flaws that the rest of us are so eager to forgive in everyone else
-
I agree Sherlock, IIRC around 6 children a year drown in the bath because their parent(s) left them briefly for a number of reasons. These are indeed very rare tragedies, but although a case for neglect on the part of the parents can undoubtedly be made, it never is, because we all recognise that there is no such thing as a perfect parent and so have nothing but extreme sympathy for these people. Unless their name is McCann of course, who for some inexplicable reason are actually expected to be perfect parents and are not allowed to exhibit the human flaws that the rest of us are so eager to forgive in everyone else
Very true, Carana. We are making mistakes all the time - and seek to learn from them. That is the main objective.
-
Very true, Carana. We are making mistakes all the time - and seek to learn from them. That is the main objective.
Not Carana Sherlock - it is moi - Benice. (no worries though)
-
Not Carana Sherlock - it is moi - Benice. (no worries though)
I'm so sorry, Benice!
Been on the old seven per cent solution again...
-
the father, who spoke at the funeral of his happiness at having had the privilege of knowing and bringing up his son for seven years.
Thank you for telling, SH. I remember what the father said. Who could forget ?
-
I'm so sorry, Benice!
Been on the old seven per cent solution again...
That's absolutely fine Sherlock - in fact I'm quite flattered to be mistaken for Carana,. ?{)(**
-
That's absolutely fine Sherlock - in fact I'm quite flattered to be mistaken for Carana,. ?{)(**
Very good of you to take it well, Benice. And I am sure Carana will be complimented too. ..
-
Please note this is a new thread containing posts split from another.
-
You asked for a single example of a fatal accident in the home, which I was able to do without consulting Google as it had been on the news today.
I followed your instructions to the letter, you then tell me I'm making a fool of myself. I still don't get it.
Anyway, here's the statistics:
Every year there are approximately 4000 deaths as the result of a home accident. Around 120 of these are below 15 years and 1300 over 75
http://www.rospa.com/homesafety/adviceandinformation/general/facts-figures.aspx
The number of sucsessfull stranger abductions is 68.
http://tna.europarchive.org/20081023123012/homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/r225.pdf
I can't find anything about the number of stranger abductions from the home, so the figures aren't quite like for like.
The accident figures are from 2002 and the abductions from 2002/3 they were the best set of data, if not the most recent.
They're all both from the uk.
Fatal accidents for children under the age of 15 =120
Successful stranger abductions =68.
I'm not going to suggest that you should have Googled it yourself before making your claim to avoid making a fool of yourself though, cause that's just mean!
Ive already seen this article and as I pointed out to you fatal accidents in the home re children in the vast majority of cases involve stairs or fires. No fire in PDL, no stairs in PDL.., making a stranger adduction far more likely...in your opening post you stated that the chance of stranger abduction was miniscule..it isn't ..your figure Is 68 that's not miniscule
-
Ive already seen this article and as I pointed out to you fatal accidents in the home re children in the vast majority of cases involve stairs or fires. No fire in PDL, no stairs in PDL.., making a stranger adduction far more likely...in your opening post you stated that the chance of stranger abduction was miniscule..it isn't ..your figure Is 68 that's not miniscule
oh for God's sake !
Please ... please ... don't present the case that young children who are left unattended at home are more at risk of stranger abduction that fatal accidents
... just for the sake of not making yourself look simple ... please don't do that
-
oh for God's sake !
Please ... please ... don't present the case that young children who are left unattended at home are more at risk of stranger abduction that fatal accidents
... just for the sake of not making yourself look simple ... please don't do that
Its not me saying that its the statistic supplied by the poster. Its called evidence
-
Its not me saying that its the statistic supplied by the poster. Its called evidence
WHAT ?
Are you claiming that 'statistically' infants left alone are more likely to be snatched from their bed by strangers than they are to suffer serious or fatal injury ?
Is that what you are claiming ?
-
WHAT ?
Are you claiming that 'statistically' infants left alone are more likely to be snatched from their bed by strangers that they are to suffer serious or fatal injury ?
Is that what you are claiming ?
It is actually what the evidence supports...even personal experience shows that although children have accidents at home it is unusual that these accidents are fatal. fatal ones usually involve fires or stairs...none of these in the pdl appt. The figure of 68 for abductions is surprisingly high.
I don't expect you to understand a post based on logic..blind prejudice is your forte as you have regularly shown
-
It is actually what the evidence supports...even personal experience shows that although children have accidents at home it is unusual that these accidents are fatal. fatal ones usually involve fires or stairs...none of these in the pdl appt. The figure of 68 for abductions is surprisingly high.
I don't expect you to understand post based on logic..blind prejudice is your forte as you have regularly shown
So when we were younger, and our children were nippers, if we'd gone round the corner to the Fisherman's Rest for the evening ( it's only round the corner and we could easily have made 'checks' on our infants every half hour or so ) ... we would have been putting them more at risk of some stranger walking in and taking one of them out of their bed and carrying them off into the darkness, than we were off putting them at risk of waking up ( in our absense ) and having an accident ?
Is that what you are saying ?
-
So when we were younger, and our children were nippers, if we'd gone round the corner to the Fisherman's Rest for the evening ( it's only round the corner and we could easily have made 'checks' on our infants every half hour or so ) ... we would have been putting them more at risk of some stranger walking in and taking one one of them out of their bed and carrying them off into the darkness, than we were off putting them at risk of waking up ( in our absense ) and having an accident ?
Is that what you are saying ?
Are you still asleep....we were discussing fatal accidents..now you change track and start to refer to accidents
-
I did indeed give much the same links on the thread "The breathtaking hypocrisy of those that support the McCanns" but they did not satisfy davel - mind you I don't see much that does satisfy him!
The accident figures for young children are the main reason why the NSPCC and government guidelines say that babies and toddlers should never be left alone, not the possibility of abduction which is relatively rare. And the reason why it is felt that the McCanns, as doctors, should have known better is, IMO, because they should be aware of this through their training, let alone the likelihood of a GP experiencing this through his/her practice. And add in the fact that a GP would be expected to report to the authorities any family they knew of leaving children in this way, and would be expected to attend subsequent case conferences. So the likelihood of the McCanns not knowing this is considerably less that the likelihood of many other parents not knowing this (although common sense should tell you not to leave such young children out of sight and hearing anyway, and especially when you know they have cried for you the night before)
I've just been to the other thread and had a look, there were some very interesting statistics in your link. one being that children of the ages 0-4 are most at risk.
Apologises for covering the same ground, I'm very new and wasn't aware that the figures had already been posted.
It is actually what the evidence supports...even personal experience shows that although children have accidents at home it is unusual that these accidents are fatal. fatal ones usually involve fires or stairs...none of these in the pdl appt. The figure of 68 for abductions is surprisingly high.
I don't expect you to understand a post based on logic..blind prejudice is your forte as you have regularly shown
I concur that 68 stranger abductions is surprisingly high, however it is still half the number of fatal accidents in the home. Also please bear in mind that so far we had found no like for like statistics for abduction from the home/ accident in the home. it would be fairer to compare all accidents to all stranger abductions.
I have to do the school run now, However, when I return I shall try and find the relevant figures. I shall also try and find an accurate number of child abductions from the home.
-
Are you still asleep....we were discussing fatal accidents..now you change track and start to refer to accidents
I can't let this go ... I can't ... because you are talking nonsense !
Say it straight ... do you think that if parents leave infants 'home alone' those infants are MORE at risk of some stranger walking in to their bedroom and carrying them off , than they are of waking up and suffering an accident ( which might be fatal )
A yes or no is necessary at this point
-
I can't let this go ... I can't ... because you are talking shite !
Say it straight ... do you think that if parents leave infants 'home alone' those infants are MORE at risk of some stranger walking in to their bedroom and carrying them off , than they are of waking up and suffering an accident ( which might be fatal )
A yes or no is necessary at this point
ive already answered this question this morning but you don't seem to have the intelligence to understand..lets keep it simple...stranger abductions..68....fatal accidents 120...source ..figures from post by cariad
If you factor out deaths from fires and stairs....which are the most common reasons for fatalities in the home abduction is much more likely
no stairs or fires in PDL so it is far more likely...that Maddie was abducted.. thats what Sy think as well
-
ive already answered this question this morning but you don't seem to have the intelligence to understand..lets keep it simple...stranger abductions..68....fatal accidents 120...source ..figures from post by cariad
If you factor out deaths from fires and stairs....which are the most common reasons for fatalities in the home abduction is much more likely
no stairs or fires in PDL so it is far more likely...that Maddie was abducted.. thats what Sy think as well
You do the McCanns no favours with this hysterical support that is beyond the realms of all rational thought
-
ive already answered this question this morning but you don't seem to have the intelligence to understand..lets keep it simple...stranger abductions..68....fatal accidents 120...source ..figures from post by cariad
If you factor out deaths from fires and stairs....which are the most common reasons for fatalities in the home abduction is much more likely
no stairs or fires in PDL so it is far more likely...that Maddie was abducted.. thats what Sy think as well
More fantasy.
CITE Proof of abduction.
-
You do the McCanns no favours with this hysterical support that is beyond the realms of all rational thought
its extremely rational and a s I have said it seems SY agree with me. The opening statement on this thread states that the chances of a stranger abduction is miniscule...that is wrong and dangerous and puts childrens lives at risk.
-
its extremely rational and a s I have said it seems SY agree with me. The opening statement on this thread states that the chances of a stranger abduction is miniscule...that is wrong and dangerous and puts childrens lives at risk.
How ironic ... a fanatical supporter of the McCann school of parenting lecturing the forum on the dangers of leaving children at risk
-
How ironic ... a fanatical supporter of the McCann school of parenting lecturing the forum on the dangers of leaving children at risk
You could not make this behaviour up.
Fanaticism doesn't even come close.
There are far more appropriate terms.
-
You could not make this behaviour up.
Fanaticism doesn't even come close.
There are fa more appropriate terms.
im not sure in the uk but here many babies and toddlers die from old blinds in windows they get the cords twisted around their necks its very tragic and it shows little ones should never be left alone
-
Members are reminded of forum rules and are requested to moderate their language.
-
Courtesy of ROSPA and another poster.
''More accidents happen at home than anywhere else
Every year there are approximately 4000 deaths as the result of a home accident. Around 120 of these are below 15 years and 1300 over 75
During 2002 there were 2.7million home accidents requiring hospital treatment, of which 477,500 involved children under five''
http://www.rospa.com/homesafety/adviceandinformation/general/facts-figures.aspx
plus this article.
http://www.southlanarkshire.gov.uk/press/article/212/fatal_home_accidents_set_to_exceed_road_deaths
-
Members are reminded of forum rules and are requested to moderate their language.
That's me is it ? ... been 'reported ' for saying davel talks shite, have I ?
I'll go back and modify my post then
... just to point out ... as you will be aware Admin ... I never press the report button myself, but there's been a lot of provocation and trouble-making going on since this trial began ( and the influx of new members who appear to be very envious of our exclusive insight into the goings on in Lisbon )
-
You do the McCanns no favours with this hysterical support that is beyond the realms of all rational thought
I second this statement. Davel, you're claiming that something which has been repeatedly demonstrated to be false, is in fact true.
No one is claiming that child abductions from the home never happen. They do! There was a case of a little girl taken from the bath not far from me. The abductor wasn't a stranger, but was a paedophile. Another girl was taken from a tent in her back garden a few years ago.
The reason I remember these incidents is because they're so rare. I still can't find statistics, but I haven't given up yet.
-
For the UK figures.
'In the UK alone, there are approximately 120 fatal accidents in the home to under 14's per annum.
The biggest cause is falls - however these are not exclusively from stairs, but also from balconies, windows and from furniture, etc. There are also deaths from poisonings, scalds, choking and strangulation, amongst others.'
Whatever way look at this, what the Mccanns did was totally inexcusable,unless you don't inhabit the real world.
-
For the UK figures.
'In the UK alone, there are approximately 120 fatal accidents in the home to under 14's per annum.
The biggest cause is falls - however these are not exclusively from stairs, but also from balconies, windows and from furniture, etc. There are also deaths from poisonings, scalds, choking and strangulation, amongst others.'
Whatever way look at this, what the Mccanns did was totally inexcusable,unless you don't inhabit the real world.
exactly who knows the twins and madie could have been playing with the curtin blinds annd maddie could have strangled herself with the cord
-
exactly who knows the twins and madie could have been playing with the curtin blinds annd maddie could have strangled herself with the cord
The bottom line Casrlymichelle is simple.
The children should never have been left alone. You can't be there every single second of every single day, but leaving them as they did was asking for trouble, and it did.
-
The bottom line Casrlymichelle is simple.
The children should never have been left alone. You can't be there every single second of every single day, but leaving them as they did was asking for trouble, and it did.
when i was a little girl my parents friends came to our hotel rooms if we were away all us kids played together and our parents had a few drinks ( not enough to get drunk etc) it was loverly and the parents relaxed and us kids got social interaction why couldnt the tapas 9 do that??
-
when i was a little girl my parents friends came to our hotel rooms if we were away all us kids played together and our parents had a few drinks ( not enough to get drunk etc) it was loverly and the parents relaxed and us kids got social interaction why couldnt the tapas 9 do that??
Good question, and one I've posed before.
Probably the simple answer is pure selfishness. They didn't want their children being in the way of a good time.
-
The bottom line Casrlymichelle is simple.
The children should never have been left alone. You can't be there every single second of every single day, but leaving them as they did was asking for trouble, and it did.
No doubt I will be criticised for saying this but it has to be said. It is unbelievable that even after poor little Madeleine remonstrated with her mother about being left alone in a strange apartment in the dark that the parents still chose to do so with the consequences that we all know so well. That isn't just careless, it is downright criminal!!
-
Good question, and one I've posed before.
Probably the simple answer is pure selfishness. They didn't want their children being in the way of a good time.
the pros will carry on about how i myself was left alone ina hotel room BUT i was 11 and my parents and their friends were out for dinner and i had a meltdown/tantrum and my parents got in big trouble from other guests because i was very distressed ( long story but anyway) but there is a world of diffrence between a 3 year old and a 11 year old and our parents never did it again they were embarrased and ashamed
-
No doubt I will be criticised for saying this but it has to be said. It is unbelievable that even after poor little Madeleine remonstrated with her mother about being left alone in a strange apartment in the dark that the parents still chose to do so with the consequences that we all know so well. That isn't just careless, it is downright criminal!!
exactly pros say it was a mistake but it wasnt if it had been a mistake the mcanns would never have done it again
-
No doubt I will be criticised for saying this but it has to be said. It is unbelievable that even after poor little Madeleine remonstrated with her mother about being left alone in a strange apartment in the dark that the parents still chose to do so with the consequences that we all know so well. That isn't just careless, it is downright criminal!!
Yes Angelo, I completely agree. 8@??)(
-
Yes Angelo, I completely agree. 8@??)(
kate said maddies remark was a passing remark........
-
the pros will carry on about how i myself was left alone ina hotel room BUT i was 11 and my parents and their friends were out for dinner and i had a meltdown/tantrum and my parents got in big trouble from other guests because i was very distressed ( long story but anyway) but there is a world of diffrence between a 3 year old and a 11 year old and our parents never did it again they were embarrased and ashamed
Yes Carlymichelle.
The mccann supporters will criticize everyone except their heroes
-
No worry Cariad (re the repeating) - it seemed an opportunity to reinforce the message.
The dismissal of the accident statistics (and the reasons for them) is very worrying to me. As is the fact that the reason WHY the McCanns should have known better, which I outlined, is also dismissed. And the fact that what they did was a deliberate decision, even after Madeleine was known to have cried in their absence, rather than the constantly reported "mistake".
I have also added before that fact that the floors in the apartment, were, I think (as they are usually in Portugal I believe) made of stone so any fall would be more damaging. They are all aspects that responsible parents would take into account before leaving three such young children alone.
The further guidelines for parents if they do decide to leave their children alone are:
•leave a contact telephone number and be available to answer it immediately
•talk to your child about keeping safe at home and point out the potential dangers
•tell them not to answer the door to strangers
•give clear instructions on what to do in an emergency - they should be able to phone the emergency services
•leave a list of trusted people they can contact
•put obvious dangers out of reach of children, for example, medicines, matches
•make sure that your child is happy about the arrangements and confident about being left
•tell your child when you'll be back and make sure you're back on time
•talk to him or her about it afterwards.
all of which would be pretty difficult for such young children, and some of which specifically apply in the McCann case - eg "tell them not to answer the door to strangers" (a bit daft if you are going to leave the door open anyway) and "make sure that your child is happy about the arrangements and confident about being left" (it doesn't sound as if Madeleine was from the talk of her and Sean crying) and "talk to him or her about it afterwards" (well, in a way they did, except that Madeleine started the conversation and the mother seems to have dismissed this)
-
No worry Cariad (re the repeating) - it seemed an opportunity to reinforce the message.
The dismissal of the accident statistics (and the reasons for them) is very worrying to me. As is the fact that the reason WHY the McCanns should have known better, which I outlined, is also dismissed. And the fact that what they did was a deliberate decision, even after Madeleine was known to have cried in their absence, rather than the constantly reported "mistake".
I have also added before that fact that the floors in the apartment, were, I think (as they are usually in Portugal I believe) made of stone so any fall would be more damaging. They are all aspects that responsible parents would take into account before leaving three such young children alone.
The further guidelines for parents if they do decide to leave their children alone are:
•leave a contact telephone number and be available to answer it immediately
•talk to your child about keeping safe at home and point out the potential dangers
•tell them not to answer the door to strangers
•give clear instructions on what to do in an emergency - they should be able to phone the emergency services
•leave a list of trusted people they can contact
•put obvious dangers out of reach of children, for example, medicines, matches
•make sure that your child is happy about the arrangements and confident about being left
•tell your child when you'll be back and make sure you're back on time
•talk to him or her about it afterwards.
all of which would be pretty difficult for such young children, and some of which specifically apply in the McCann case - eg "tell them not to answer the door to strangers" (a bit daft if you are going to leave the door open anyway) and "make sure that your child is happy about the arrangements and confident about being left" (it doesn't sound as if Madeleine was from the talk of her and Sean crying) and "talk to him or her about it afterwards" (well, in a way they did, except that Madeleine started the conversation and the mother seems to have dismissed this)
Thanks for that CPN.
Now let's see if there are any reasoned and logical replies from the mccann supporters.
-
im not sure in the uk but here many babies and toddlers die from old blinds in windows they get the cords twisted around their necks its very tragic and it shows little ones should never be left alone
Good point, carlymichelle. Blinds and many other household items come with warnings now about child safety.
-
Just out of interest is there a possibility that at least some cot deaths may have been included within fatal accidents in the home?
-
#
Just out of interest is there a possibility that at least some cot deaths may have been included within fatal accidents in the home?
I have just been looking at some info associated with that.
Current advice to parents is that young babies are safest sleeping in the same bedroom as parents. Cot deaths tend to occur more often if the child has been unattended for a while. Various reasons for this - not all relevant to this thread. But the research is there.
Seems to me just plain common sense that the longer a child of any age is left unattended, the greater the chance of an accident of some description taking place.
-
Just out of interest is there a possibility that at least some cot deaths may have been included within fatal accidents in the home?
My first response would be "unlikely - as cot deaths are not usually subsequent to accidents.
But I checked http://www.babycentre.co.uk/a419/sudden-infant-death-syndrome-sids which says: "In less than half of all cases of SIDS, a health condition, illness or accident is found to be the cause" and http://www.babycentre.co.uk/a418/safety-in-your-babys-bedroom gives more information and some examples as to how accidents can cause cot death (as I understand the page) eg "If your cot is second-hand and painted, strip and re-paint it with lead-free paint. If your child breathes in lead dust, lead fumes or swallows anything with lead in it, he can get lead poisoning, which can cause learning disabilities and other neurological problems." and - (my addition) maybe cot death. Personally I would have though that a health condition or illness were far more likely to lead to a cot death for the reason I have already given
-
the pros will carry on about how i myself was left alone ina hotel room BUT i was 11 and my parents and their friends were out for dinner and i had a meltdown/tantrum and my parents got in big trouble from other guests because i was very distressed ( long story but anyway) but there is a world of diffrence between a 3 year old and a 11 year old and our parents never did it again they were embarrased and ashamed
No wonder they were ashamed! Having an eleven year old child who has a screaming tantrum would make most parents ashamed. I hope you were ashamed as well.
-
The dismissal of the accident statistics (and the reasons for them) is very worrying to me.
I'm sure you know all about the prosecutors' fallacy.
Ally that to 3 zonked and exhausted children, all tucked up in bed, sleeping soundly and looked in on regularly while the parents dined a handful of yards away ...
-
Good point, carlymichelle. Blinds and many other household items come with warnings now about child safety.
There was a couple on TV just yesterday I think calling for a ban, as their child sadly did die that way.
-
The dismissal of the accident statistics (and the reasons for them) is very worrying to me.
I'm sure you know all about the prosecutors' fallacy.
Ally that to 3 zonked and exhausted children, all tucked up in bed, sleeping soundly and looked in on regularly while the parents dined a handful of yards away ...
Six years on and you and others are still excusing it. Bonkers.
-
The dismissal of the accident statistics (and the reasons for them) is very worrying to me.
I'm sure you know all about the prosecutors' fallacy.
Ally that to 3 zonked and exhausted children, all tucked up in bed, sleeping soundly and looked in on regularly while the parents dined a handful of yards away ...
Two observations ferryman. One...why were they (sic) zonked? And two...Kate McCann never checked on Madeleine once in all the time she was in the tapas restaurant. Does that sound like a caring mother or a mother who knew they were zonked and were hardly likely to wake up even if a coach and horses were driven through that bedroom??
It would be worthy of note if this was a break in the evening routine she had established?
-
Just out of interest is there a possibility that at least some cot deaths may have been included within fatal accidents in the home?
My first response would be "unlikely - as cot deaths are not usually subsequent to accidents.
But I checked http://www.babycentre.co.uk/a419/sudden-infant-death-syndrome-sids which says: "In less than half of all cases of SIDS, a health condition, illness or accident is found to be the cause" and http://www.babycentre.co.uk/a418/safety-in-your-babys-bedroom gives more information and some examples as to how accidents can cause cot death (as I understand the page) eg "If your cot is second-hand and painted, strip and re-paint it with lead-free paint. If your child breathes in lead dust, lead fumes or swallows anything with lead in it, he can get lead poisoning, which can cause learning disabilities and other neurological problems." and - (my addition) maybe cot death. Personally I would have though that a health condition or illness were far more likely to lead to a cot death for the reason I have already given
I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that cot deaths are recorded as death by naturel causes by a coroner so wouldn't fall into an accidental death.
more figures:
I found this sight today
http://www.pact-online.org/index.php/taken/taken-study
You can download a booklet giving information on child abductions in the UK.
They cover all types off abductions, but I'll post snippets of the data relevant to our discussion here.
Abductions by a stranger The police data included 247 cases (273 victims) where a child was abducted by a stranger. Three-quarters were attempted abductions.
(273 divided by four = 68.25 successful stranger abductions)
Four attempted abductions by strangers occurred when an offender tried to deceive hospital staff, school staff or the parent themselves into releasing the child into their care. In 22 cases the offender attempted to take a young child in the presence of their parent(s) whilst in a shopping centre, supermarket, play area, other public places, or – in one case – from their home.
(This was an attempted abduction)
Abductions by a stranger accounted for the single largest category of all abductions (42 per cent of all cases). However, in 186 cases, the offender failed to actually abduct the victim(s) and the case was an attempted abduction18. Therefore, three- quarters of stranger abductions were actually attempted abductions.
(Attempted) abduction with parent present
Two children were removed from their home address. In one case a neighbour entered the victim’s home, assaulted the mother, and then left with the victim, before the mother regained the child. In the other case, a person whose relationship to the
victim was not known removed the child from their home address while their mother was upstairs but was stopped nearby.
Completed abductions by strangers (sexual motive) 15 children, in 12 cases, were successfully abducted by an offender with a clear sexual motive.
The victims ranged in age from 7 to 17 years, with 11 victims being between 13 and 17 years old. Three victims were boys; the rest were girls. 12 victims were white, one was black, one was of other ethnic origin and the ethnicity of one was not known.
Five of the victims suffered a sexual assault as a result of the offence (see Table A6 in the Appendix)33. Two boys suffered a sex attack after being lured back to an offender’s house where they stayed the night. Three girls were raped, each in separate offences. Two had first met the perpetrator online (see text box for more details). The third was forced into a car whilst walking and was released after the offence.
Three other victims suffered minor physical injuries. In two of these cases the victim’s clothing was removed. The remaining seven victims suffered no apparent physical injuries (though it is very likely that emotional or psychological trauma did result from the offences).
All offences lasted for less than 24 hours, with the exception of one case which continued for between one and two days (in two cases this information was not available). Two cases involved the victim being abducted by more than one offender, though both resulted in no physical injury.
In four cases the victim(s) was abducted from a street, in three cases the victim was in a park, common or open space, two victims were in a bus station at the time of the offence, and two were near to their home address.
As a result of these incidents police recorded eight offences of child abduction, six offences of kidnapping and one offence of abduction (Scotland) (see Table A1, Appendix).
Abduction by stranger (unconfirmed sexual motive) Though unconfirmed, the motive in several other abductions completed by strangers appeared to be sexual.
In one case a registered sex offender befriended two young children and took them back to his house, where he gave them food and let them play on a games console. They left a short time later with no apparent sexual offence having been committed.
In another case, a girl was picked up by a man she met on a social networking site and was taken back to his home. The victim called the police and she was released without any apparent physical injury. In a separate offence, a girl was dragged into bushes but was released after screaming and alerting a passer-by.
So according to this information there were no successful child abductions from the home in the given period (12 months I believe, from 2011/2012, )
It's also worth noting that the mean age of a victim was 13 years.
The booklet is 82 pages long, I have picked very small points out of a lot of data. I highly recommend reading all the relevant passages and looking at the graphs in context.
Cariad.
-
The dismissal of the accident statistics (and the reasons for them) is very worrying to me.
I'm sure you know all about the prosecutors' fallacy.
Ally that to 3 zonked and exhausted children, all tucked up in bed, sleeping soundly and looked in on regularly while the parents dined a handful of yards away ...
A) not zonked enough to not wake and cry on other evenings (and who knows when other times), so not always sleeping soundly. And children usually sleep less soundly when in strange surroundings
B) A handful of yards away (!!!) but beyond the range whereby the children could be heard and seen, assuming there was indeed an abduction.
Your attempts to excuse the behaviour of the parents I find a disgrace - as well as untruthful
-
Ferryman must have massive hands!
@)(++(*
-
the pros will carry on about how i myself was left alone ina hotel room BUT i was 11 and my parents and their friends were out for dinner and i had a meltdown/tantrum and my parents got in big trouble from other guests because i was very distressed ( long story but anyway) but there is a world of diffrence between a 3 year old and a 11 year old and our parents never did it again they were embarrased and ashamed
What "pros"? You can now predict who will say what and it will centre on you?
-
No doubt I will be criticised for saying this but it has to be said. It is unbelievable that even after poor little Madeleine remonstrated with her mother about being left alone in a strange apartment in the dark that the parents still chose to do so with the consequences that we all know so well. That isn't just careless, it is downright criminal!!
I think if it were criminal they would have been charged. As it was, they weren't. The rest I agree with, what they did was wrong. However, it was done and Madeliene is missing, they've paid a terrible price for that decision, no where near as terrible as their child. I'm certain that fact hasn't passed them by.
-
No wonder they were ashamed! Having an eleven year old child who has a screaming tantrum would make most parents ashamed. I hope you were ashamed as well.
Should they have felt any more ashamed than two parents who left their child so distressed that their neighbour could hear it ?
-
I think if it were criminal they would have been charged. As it was, they weren't. The rest I agree with, what they did was wrong. However, it was done and Madeliene is missing, they've paid a terrible price for that decision, no where near as terrible as their child. I'm certain that fact hasn't passed them by.
My reference to criminal was a 'figure of speech' and not a literal observation.
-
We almost agree on something then.
-
I think if it were criminal they would have been charged. As it was, they weren't. The rest I agree with, what they did was wrong. However, it was done and Madeliene is missing, they've paid a terrible price for that decision, no where near as terrible as their child. I'm certain that fact hasn't passed them by.
Jazzy, I have said before that this assumption that "if it were criminal they would have been charged" is not correct, at least not in the UK, I don't know about in Portugal. Prosecution is the last action Social Services Departments here take - if a situation can be dealt with in other ways, it will be. And I have given examples: parenting classes, Child Protection Register etc And we do not, and should not, know what actions have been taken by Social Services here, if any
-
I suspect that at the time, with Amaral convinced he had his culprits, any charge he could substantiate he'd make.
-
I suspect that at the time, with Amaral convinced he had his culprits, any charge he could substantiate he'd make.
Police don't make those decisions Jazzy.
-
I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that cot deaths are recorded as death by naturel causes by a coroner so wouldn't fall into an accidental death.
more figures:
I found this sight today
http://www.pact-online.org/index.php/taken/taken-study
You can download a booklet giving information on child abductions in the UK.
They cover all types off abductions, but I'll post snippets of the data relevant to our discussion here.
Abductions by a stranger The police data included 247 cases (273 victims) where a child was abducted by a stranger. Three-quarters were attempted abductions.
(273 divided by four = 68.25 successful stranger abductions)
Four attempted abductions by strangers occurred when an offender tried to deceive hospital staff, school staff or the parent themselves into releasing the child into their care. In 22 cases the offender attempted to take a young child in the presence of their parent(s) whilst in a shopping centre, supermarket, play area, other public places, or – in one case – from their home.
(This was an attempted abduction)
Abductions by a stranger accounted for the single largest category of all abductions (42 per cent of all cases). However, in 186 cases, the offender failed to actually abduct the victim(s) and the case was an attempted abduction18. Therefore, three- quarters of stranger abductions were actually attempted abductions.
(Attempted) abduction with parent present
Two children were removed from their home address. In one case a neighbour entered the victim’s home, assaulted the mother, and then left with the victim, before the mother regained the child. In the other case, a person whose relationship to the
victim was not known removed the child from their home address while their mother was upstairs but was stopped nearby.
Completed abductions by strangers (sexual motive) 15 children, in 12 cases, were successfully abducted by an offender with a clear sexual motive.
The victims ranged in age from 7 to 17 years, with 11 victims being between 13 and 17 years old. Three victims were boys; the rest were girls. 12 victims were white, one was black, one was of other ethnic origin and the ethnicity of one was not known.
Five of the victims suffered a sexual assault as a result of the offence (see Table A6 in the Appendix)33. Two boys suffered a sex attack after being lured back to an offender’s house where they stayed the night. Three girls were raped, each in separate offences. Two had first met the perpetrator online (see text box for more details). The third was forced into a car whilst walking and was released after the offence.
Three other victims suffered minor physical injuries. In two of these cases the victim’s clothing was removed. The remaining seven victims suffered no apparent physical injuries (though it is very likely that emotional or psychological trauma did result from the offences).
All offences lasted for less than 24 hours, with the exception of one case which continued for between one and two days (in two cases this information was not available). Two cases involved the victim being abducted by more than one offender, though both resulted in no physical injury.
In four cases the victim(s) was abducted from a street, in three cases the victim was in a park, common or open space, two victims were in a bus station at the time of the offence, and two were near to their home address.
As a result of these incidents police recorded eight offences of child abduction, six offences of kidnapping and one offence of abduction (Scotland) (see Table A1, Appendix).
Abduction by stranger (unconfirmed sexual motive) Though unconfirmed, the motive in several other abductions completed by strangers appeared to be sexual.
In one case a registered sex offender befriended two young children and took them back to his house, where he gave them food and let them play on a games console. They left a short time later with no apparent sexual offence having been committed.
In another case, a girl was picked up by a man she met on a social networking site and was taken back to his home. The victim called the police and she was released without any apparent physical injury. In a separate offence, a girl was dragged into bushes but was released after screaming and alerting a passer-by.
So according to this information there were no successful child abductions from the home in the given period (12 months I believe, from 2011/2012, )
It's also worth noting that the mean age of a victim was 13 years.
The booklet is 82 pages long, I have picked very small points out of a lot of data. I highly recommend reading all the relevant passages and looking at the graphs in context.
Cariad.
Many thanks for these informations, Cariad. Very clarifying.
-
Many thanks for these informations, Cariad. Very clarifying.
You're more than welcome. I'm glad to be of assistance in my own small way.
I do wish that Davel would read it though.....
-
Yes, thank you Cariad. Interesting reading.
So there were attempted abductions, one by a stranger, from the home with a parent present.
Cariads report SNIP/-
(Attempted) abduction with parent present
Two children were removed from their home address. In one case a neighbour entered the victim’s home, assaulted the mother, and then left with the victim, before the mother regained the child. In the other case, a person whose relationship to the
victim was not known removed the child from their home address while their mother was upstairs but was stopped nearby.
No matter that in these cases they were not successful. The attempts were made and that shows how audacious these pervs can be
Thank you Cariad. Very useful information.
-
Yes, thank you Cariad. Interesting reading.
So there were attempted abductions, one by a stranger, from the home with a parent present.
Cariads report
No matter that in these cases they were not successful. The attempts were made and that shows how audacious these pervs can be
Thank you Cariad. Very useful information.
It does happen.
Please don't click on the link if you're easily upset. The case was horrific!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/5069656.stm
This happened Twenty minutes by car from my house.
It is extremely rare though. I stand by my assertion that a fatal accident is Statistically more likely than an abduction from the home.
I'm not claiming that it's impossible that Madeleine was abducted. Children are, and I think everybody accepts that. But Davel's insistence that abduction is more likely than accident when a child (any child) is left alone is, quite frankly, bugging the hell out of me.
-
I'm not claiming that it's impossible that Madeleine was abducted. Children are, and I think everybody accepts that.
This man, who seems to be compulsive (something normally psychiatrists observe), stole the little girl just after her returning home from shopping with her mum. Did the mother let him in, as she knew him, was it an opportunistic abduction ?
-
This man, who seems to be compulsive (something normally psychiatrists observe), stole the little girl just after her returning home from shopping with her mum. Did the mother let him in, as she knew him, was it an opportunistic abduction ?
Yes he was known to the family and allowed to enter the home. This link has more details. He took the child out of the bath when the mother was making a phone call!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/5063664.stm
-
I'm not claiming that it's impossible that Madeleine was abducted. Children are, and I think everybody accepts that. But Davel's insistence that abduction is more likely than accident when a child (any child) is left alone is, quite frankly, bugging the hell out of me.
I've given figures before, Cariad, but they are ignored when it is convenient!! Or you are asked for even more information ie the info given is, presumably, not acceptable!
Home Safety Facts and Figures (I have selected the relevant ones)
* More accidents happen at home than anywhere else
* Every year there are approximately 4000 deaths as the result of a home accident. Around 120 of these are below 15 years and 1300 over 75
* During 2002 there were 2.7million home accidents requiring hospital treatment, of which 477,500 involved children under five
* Children under the age of five and people over 65 (particularly those over 75) are most likely to have an accident at home
* Every year around 120 children under 14 die as the result of an accident in the home
* Around 25,000 under-fives attend A&E departments each year after being accidentally poisoned
* 26,000 under-fives are burnt or scalded in the home every year. A hot drink can still scald a small child up to 15 minutes after it is made
* Every year more than 4,200 children are involved in falls on the stairs and 4,000 children under the age of 15 are injured falling from windows
Even if you buy a ticket every week in a year you are 20 times more likely to suffer a fatal home accident that you are to win the National Lottery!"
http://www.rospa.com/homesafety/adviceandinformation/general/facts-figures.aspx
-
There's a radio 4 programme called More of Less that I listen too. this is the write up for it:
Tim Harford explains - and sometimes debunks - the numbers and statistics used in political debate, the news and everyday life
They take listeners questions regarding statistics in the news. I've been wondering if there's a way of wording an E-mail that would get them to do a feature on abduction v's accident. It's such a sensitive subject that I doubt they'll touch it with a barge pole.
I would truly love to get a statistician to look at it and work out the probability though. ?{)(**
-
Yes he was known to the family and allowed to enter the home. This link has more details. He took the child out of the bath when the mother was making a phone call!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/5063664.stm
Thank you, Cariad. It beggars belief : a notorious paedophile, a 3 yrs old alone in her bath (or was his brother there too, poor boy who couldn't save her?) and a mother making (not answering) a phone call.
-
Thank you, Cariad. It beggars belief : a notorious paedophile, a 3 yrs old alone in her bath (or was his brother there too, poor boy who couldn't save her?) and a mother making (not answering) a phone call.
Awful isn't it? I dread to think what would have happened to the little girl if the police hadn't notice that the lights were out on his car. It was just chance that they caught him.
-
Throwing a stone into the water:
"Sweden, the United Kingdom, Italy and the Netherlands occupy the
top four places in the league table of child injury deaths.At the
bottom of the league are the United States and Portugal, where the
rate of child injury deaths is over twice the level of the leading
countries."
http://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/repcard2e.pdf
Bit pointless on this thread which relates to stranger abductions from home and fatal accidents in the home......and the belief by the poster davel that the first is more likely than the second
@)(++(*
Figures including car accidents or other fatal causes outside the home are irrelevant here
-
I suspect if it were the other way around, you would be happy to accept it. What about the post yesterday about child death by mistreatment:
According to this UNICEF report
www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/violence_against.pdf
Portugal has a child death by mistreatment 10-15 times higher than the European average. Page 4, second column. To avoid accusations of anti-Iberian prejudice, Portugal has the worst rate and Spain has the best rate.
I will accept anything relevant to the thread topic and that is still irrelevant
-
I suspect if it were the other way around, you would be happy to accept it. What about the post yesterday about child death by mistreatment:
According to this UNICEF report
www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/violence_against.pdf
Portugal has a child death by mistreatment 10-15 times higher than the European average. Page 4, second column. To avoid accusations of anti-Iberian prejudice, Portugal has the worst rate and Spain has the best rate.
We're trying to find like for like figures to compare the chances of a fatal accident in the home and being abducted from the home.
The best we've come up with is that 120 children under the age of 15 suffer a fatal accident in the home each year and 68 children are successfully abducted by stranger from anywhere each year.
We've found 3 case's of attempted abduction from the home and one successful, though it wasn't in the 2011/12 report that pact made.
Any help with this would be greatly appreciated.
-
We're trying to find like for like figures to compare the chances of a fatal accident in the home and being abducted from the home.
The best we've come up with is that 120 children under the age of 15 suffer a fatal accident in the home each year and 68 children are successfully abducted by stranger from anywhere each year.
We've found 3 case's of attempted abduction from the home and one successful, though it wasn't in the 2011/12 report that pact made.
Any help with this would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks for bringing the thread back on topic cariad
-
And I thought we had been led to believe that the Portuguese were always attentive to their children, unlike callous Brits.
Seems the stats disagree.
The stats disagree?
@)(++(*
The stats of child deaths by any means has nothng to do with attentiveness.....seeing as USA is bottom of the pile I suppose they are the most unattentive parents in the world
Now in your vast knowledge Im sure you might contribute to the thread topic and prove davel has a point in saying in saying stranger abductions from home are more common an fatal accidents there! Wont hold my breath
-
US stats are distorted by a dreadful litany of gun deaths- usually handguns kept in nightstands.
Even if that is the case still doesnt support your assertion that the unicef report suggests any link between death and unattendance
You havent given your opinion on davels position yet, Im curious....do yu believe that it is more likely a child will be stolen from their own home by a stranger an having a fatal accident?
-
I did not make that assertion- another straw man argument.
There is a difference in meaning between attentive and attendance. look it up.
Sorry edited my previous post await your reply
-
lets just get straight what I actually said
you have managed to supply one example, not the thousand hits from google that you expected, fatal accidents in the home, not involving stairs or fires are incredibly rare. Stranger abduction from the home is almost certainly more common
Now that is entirely different to abductions are more common than fatal accidents
-
I suspect if it were the other way around, you would be happy to accept it. What about the post yesterday about child death by mistreatment:
According to this UNICEF report
www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/violence_against.pdf
Portugal has a child death by mistreatment 10-15 times higher than the European average. Page 4, second column. To avoid accusations of anti-Iberian prejudice, Portugal has the worst rate and Spain has the best rate.
That is astonishing. I hope for the sake of the children of Portugal that these findings are acted upon. A public campaign might be worthwhile.
-
lets just get straight what I actually said
Now that is entirely different to abductions are more common than fatal accidents
Youre still wrong in that fatal accidents not involving falls or fires are incredibly rare....they are LESS rare than stranger abductions
-
Youre still wrong in that fatal accidents not involving falls or fires are incredibly rare....they are LESS rare than stranger abductions
Who says so
-
Who says so
you posted the original assertion, you back it up
-
you have managed to supply one example, not the thousand hits from google that you expected, fatal accidents in the home, not involving stairs or fires are incredibly rare. Stranger abduction from the home is almost certainly more common IMO
Can you prove me wrong
-
you have managed to supply one example, not the thousand hits from google that you expected, fatal accidents in the home, not involving stairs or fires are incredibly rare. Stranger abduction from the home is almost certainly more common IMO
Can you prove me wrong
Last time Im going to say it, you made the statement, you are the one who has to back it up....others have tried to help by showing evidence that in one year 120 children died as a result of a home injury...the only abduction data states 68..... Which is about half and that is not EVEN from home...give it up
-
Have we had this in here yet?
(yes it's for America, but even so I think it has relevance)
Abductions in perspective:
Number of children age 2 – 14 killed in car accidents, as passengers: 1300
Number of children killed each year by family members and acquaintances: About 1000
Number of children abducted in “stereotypical kidnappings” (kidnapped by a stranger for ransom or for sexual purposes and/or transported away) in 1999, the most recent year for which we have statistics: 115.
Number of those children killed by their abductor: About 50.
Murders of children by abductors constitute less than one half of 1% of all murders in America.
Stranger Danger?
Of all children under age 5 murdered from 1976-2005 –
31% were killed by fathers
29% were killed by mothers
23% were killed by male acquaintances
7% were killed by other relatives
3% were killed by strangers
Moral: Your safest bet is to leave your child with a stranger.
SOURCE: http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/children.cfm
There is approximately one child abduction murder for every 10,000 reports of a missing child. (Source: Polly Klaas Foundation: http://www.pollyklaas.org/media/pdf/Abduction-Homicide-Study.pdf)
Put it another way: The Department of Justice reports that of the 800,000 children reported “missing” in the United States each year, 115 are the result of “stereotypical kidnapping” — a stranger snatching the child. About 90 percent of abductees return home within 24 hours and the vast majority are teenage runaways.
For more statistics and an analysis of the number of children reported missing versus the number of children actually abducted by strangers, please see the Second National Incidence Studies of Missing, Abducted, Runaway and Thrownaway Children conducted by the Department of Juvenile Justice & Deliquency Prevention: http://www.ncjrs.gov/html/o[Name removed]dp/nismart/03/ns5.html
Source: http://www.freerangekids.com/crime-statistics/ (http://www.freerangekids.com/crime-statistics/)
And this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/117692.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/117692.stm) (from 1998 but still relevant)
And this:
Figures from the Australian Institute of Criminology (AIC) show that from 1995 to 2004, the
overall rate of abductions and assaults in Australia rose from 2.5 to 3.8 victims per 100,000 of
population. Teenagers comprise a significantly majority of these victims, with females aged
fifteen to nineteen years at the greatest risk of harm. Abductions of younger children by non-
family members are relatively uncommon; of the 768 abductions recorded in 2004, only 5.86% or
forty-five abductions were of children aged nine years or younger (AIC 2005). The majority of
child harm reported to authorities is child abuse by family members or close acquaintances
(Australian Bureau of Statistics 2009). Even more so than traffic accidents, this data suggests that
abduction does not constitute a significant threat to children in Australia.
Yeah, Australia's not the UK or Portugal, I know...
I'd say Davel is talking out of an orifice other than his mouth personally and is unable to backtrack from an indefensible position. Funny watching the squirming though.
-
Have we had this in here yet?
(yes it's for America, but even so I think it has relevance)
Source: http://www.freerangekids.com/crime-statistics/ (http://www.freerangekids.com/crime-statistics/)
And this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/117692.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/117692.stm) (from 1998 but still relevant)
And this:
Yeah, Australia's not the UK or Portugal, I know...
I'd say Davel is talking out of an orifice other than his mouth personally and is unable to backtrack from an indefensible position. Funny watching the squirming though.
I think you are accusing me of talking out of my arse, don't be coy..say it like it is. I imagine you are an expert at this but I can assure you it is something I dont do.
-
Edwards seems unable to have a discussion without resorting to insults. He behaves like a child, or more probably an elderly person reverting to childhood. he will now go crying to the mods claiming he is being insulted
-
Have we had this in here yet?
(yes it's for America, but even so I think it has relevance)
Source: http://www.freerangekids.com/crime-statistics/ (http://www.freerangekids.com/crime-statistics/)
And this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/117692.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/117692.stm) (from 1998 but still relevant)
And this:
Yeah, Australia's not the UK or Portugal, I know...
I'd say Davel is talking out of an orifice other than his mouth personally and is unable to backtrack from an indefensible position. Funny watching the squirming though.
Just goes to show stranger abduction and or killing of children is so very rare and the majority of child abductions/deaths are by family members or friends or associates....something we all know anyway....statistics do speak....they may not speak for individual cases....but they are an info tool that police use....still...there is nothing to suggest Madeleine Mccann did notsuffer some sort of fatal accident, something which was more likely than being abucted from her bed by a stranger...unless davel can prove otherwise
-
lets just get straight what I actually said
Now that is entirely different to abductions are more common than fatal accidents
It's snipped your quote, but basically you added the proviso of it not involving stairs or fire.
"Falls are the most common accidents, which can cause serious injury at any time of life. Fifty-five per cent of accidental injuries in the home involve falls"
http://www.rospa.com/homesafety/adviceandinformation/general/facts-figures.aspx
I'm going to be excessively kind to you and remove 55% of the 120 deaths (despite the citation saying falls, not stairs and accidents not fatalities) leaving a total of 54 deaths.
I'm going to be generous again and leave in the sole example of the one child taken from the bath as a successful stranger abduction from the home, even though he was known to the family and invited inside the dwelling.
The fiures now read 54 v's 1.
If you wish to disagree with this total davel, you'll need to supply your own figures to back it up.
-
It's snipped your quote, but basically you added the proviso of it not involving stairs or fire.
"Falls are the most common accidents, which can cause serious injury at any time of life. Fifty-five per cent of accidental injuries in the home involve falls"
http://www.rospa.com/homesafety/adviceandinformation/general/facts-figures.aspx
I'm going to be excessively kind to you and remove 55% of the 120 deaths (despite the citation saying falls, not stairs and accidents not fatalities) leaving a total of 54 deaths.
I'm going to be generous again and leave in the sole example of the one child taken from the bath as a successful stranger abduction from the home, even though he was known to the family and invited inside the dwelling.
The fiures now read 54 v's 1.
If you wish to disagree with this total davel, you'll need to supply your own figures to back it up.
You've stuck doggedly to the topic of the thread ( depite attempts at distraction ) and you've evolved it beautifully ... well done cariad
-
You've stuck doggedly to the topic of the thread ( depite attempts at distraction ) and you've evolved it beautifully ... well done cariad
What you haven't seen is me repeated banging my head against the desk in front of me crying "why won't he see reason, why! why!!!"
8(0(*
-
What you haven't seen is me repeated banging my head against the desk in front of me crying "why won't he see reason, why! why!!!"
8(0(*
I can imagine @)(++(*
-
What you haven't seen is me repeated banging my head against the desk in front of me crying "why won't he see reason, why! why!!!"
8(0(*
The ONLY reason is because he believes Maddie Mccann was abducted and nothing can shake that belief, ecen has to post nonsense to back it up
-
Edwards seems unable to have a discussion without resorting to insults. He behaves like a child, or more probably an elderly person reverting to childhood. he will now go crying to the mods claiming he is being insulted
Let's all keep calm guys and gals. Emotions are running high at the moment so let's please think before posting. TY