Stranger danger
When
I was travelling to Canada for the first time, my flight was through
Heathrow with a six-hour wait before the second leg. It was the first
time that I had ever flown anywhere, so to kill time, I walked around
the huge terminal to explore and see everything. In one remote hallway,
there was a movator which was slowly rolling towards me. The long
hallway was otherwise devoid of people except for me and a little girl
about six years old coming from the other direction. Instead of walking
normally, she was riding on the outside edge of the movator, clinging
to the handle belt that moved her forward and letting her feet slide on
the metal edge. She was facing away from me so that she was looking
towards the direction that she was coming from, so she didn't realize
that about ten meters ahead of her there was a vertical steel pole
planted next to the movator, with perhaps a ten-centimeter gap between
the pole and the movator. I don't remember the exact details after all
these years, but certainly the gap wouldn't have been wide enough for
her to squeeze through, and I would assume that such a movator had
quite a lot of pushing power behind it.
I quickly walked to the girl, grabbed her, lifted her in the air and put her down to stand on the carpet outside the movator, and in the same continuous motion, kept walking without stopping to say anything to her. Even then, I instinctively knew better than to do anything else. The girl was surprised of this sudden event, but at least she wasn't hurt. When I took a look back she was still standing there, confused of what had happened. And heck, for all I know, maybe she is still standing there.
I linked earlier to another article about the story "Did Pedophilia Hysteria Cause Child's Death?" about a guy who didn't stop to help a wandering toddler since he feared that if he approached the kid to help him, somebody might mistake him for a child abductor. And in my opinion, this was the smart thing to do in a nation where an angry mob once torched a doctor's office because the door said "pediatrician". Unfortunately, the kid later walked to a pond and drowned.
As my long-time readers know, in summertime I love to make long walks and explore new neighbourhoods around the Greater Toronto area. I am usually the one that people ask directions from, but once when I was younger and walking in an unfamiliar part of Tampere I stopped to ask directions from two ten-year-old boys because they were the only living people around the whole area that I could see. Most certainly I would never do the same thing here, although fortunately it's not like I'd need to. If I was in a real hurry to get somewhere, that somewhere would be in an area where there are usually lots of other people around.
Because of this hobby of exploration, reading about this incident made me think about what I would do in the same situation, if I came upon a little kid alone somewhere with no other people around. After a short deliberation, my answer is that I would do the exact same thing that the guy in the news article did and stay away, unless the danger to the kid was obvious and imminent. Doing anything else is just too risky to even contemplate. If I approach the kid to ask him if he is lost, what if the kid runs away screaming? And what if the kid stays there and talks to me, and the worried parent or some do-gooder bystander suddenly appears somewhere and starts screaming for help or attacking me? What if I talk to the kid and it turns out that he really is lost? I certainly know better than to take his hand and start walking away with a crying kid that is not mine.
The bottom line is this: If the choice ever comes to between the kid remaining lost and in possible danger, and me possibly ending up in a kafkaesque nightmare of child abduction accusations and having my picture and name published in the newspaper and losing my good name and reputation forever, then well, that's just too fucking bad for the kid.
I quickly walked to the girl, grabbed her, lifted her in the air and put her down to stand on the carpet outside the movator, and in the same continuous motion, kept walking without stopping to say anything to her. Even then, I instinctively knew better than to do anything else. The girl was surprised of this sudden event, but at least she wasn't hurt. When I took a look back she was still standing there, confused of what had happened. And heck, for all I know, maybe she is still standing there.
I linked earlier to another article about the story "Did Pedophilia Hysteria Cause Child's Death?" about a guy who didn't stop to help a wandering toddler since he feared that if he approached the kid to help him, somebody might mistake him for a child abductor. And in my opinion, this was the smart thing to do in a nation where an angry mob once torched a doctor's office because the door said "pediatrician". Unfortunately, the kid later walked to a pond and drowned.
As my long-time readers know, in summertime I love to make long walks and explore new neighbourhoods around the Greater Toronto area. I am usually the one that people ask directions from, but once when I was younger and walking in an unfamiliar part of Tampere I stopped to ask directions from two ten-year-old boys because they were the only living people around the whole area that I could see. Most certainly I would never do the same thing here, although fortunately it's not like I'd need to. If I was in a real hurry to get somewhere, that somewhere would be in an area where there are usually lots of other people around.
Because of this hobby of exploration, reading about this incident made me think about what I would do in the same situation, if I came upon a little kid alone somewhere with no other people around. After a short deliberation, my answer is that I would do the exact same thing that the guy in the news article did and stay away, unless the danger to the kid was obvious and imminent. Doing anything else is just too risky to even contemplate. If I approach the kid to ask him if he is lost, what if the kid runs away screaming? And what if the kid stays there and talks to me, and the worried parent or some do-gooder bystander suddenly appears somewhere and starts screaming for help or attacking me? What if I talk to the kid and it turns out that he really is lost? I certainly know better than to take his hand and start walking away with a crying kid that is not mine.
The bottom line is this: If the choice ever comes to between the kid remaining lost and in possible danger, and me possibly ending up in a kafkaesque nightmare of child abduction accusations and having my picture and name published in the newspaper and losing my good name and reputation forever, then well, that's just too fucking bad for the kid.
It's a sad comment on our society, but I'm afraid that I would probably do the same thing...
Posted by Anonymous | 3:24 PM
Sad logic from Mr Kokkarinen, how about informing authorities or hanging around to see nothing really happens. What if she/he would be your own child to be left walkig to highway and die.
Mr Kokkarinen, do you also run away in case you find someone stabbed or as a victim of a hit and run driver.
Posted by Anonymous | 3:37 PM
It's difficult to say "what should I do" because there are many different scenarios one might encounter. If I were in my house alone and saw a child outside who was obviously too young to be unaccompanied, I'd immediately call 911 - doing so would establish a record as well as summon help - and then go outside to watch the child from a safe distance. I'd try to see if I could get one of the women neighbors to come out, or as a better-than-nothing alternative another man. I would *not* go right up to the child unless he or she were in immediate danger.
I suppose the proliferation of cell phones makes things easier. If, for example, you were to find yourself in the same position as the English bricklayer in the Fox article, and see a child in potential danger while in your car or otherwise away from home, a cell phone would allow you to call for help without putting yourself in a compromising position ... but what if you placed the call and moments later saw the toddler heading toward a body of water? She'll drown before the police arrive. I'd certainly hate to be faced with that sort of dilemma.
Your airport scenario is a tough one. The safest thing would be to look for an emergency stop button on the people mover, though I suspect that most people would instinctively react as you did even though that could result in all sorts of trouble.
As sort of a flip side, I've heard that parents are advised to tell their small children that if they ever become separated from a parent in a public place like a store, to go to the first woman they see and ask for help. That's not only safer for the children but helps keep men out of potential danger.
Peter
Iron Rails & Iron Weights
Posted by Anonymous | 3:52 PM
How about stopping the kid and phoning the police? If someone asks something, you can say that "police is already coming". Child molester do not phone to anyone.
Posted by Anonymous | 3:55 PM
Anonymous: Mr Kokkarinen, do you also run away in case you find someone stabbed or as a victim of a hit and run driver.
No, since as a pedestrian I know that I will not charged with the crime that was committed, and my attempts to help the victim and give him first aid could not possibly be misunderstood to be a serious and despicable crime.
If you can't tell the difference between these two scenarios, I don't think that I can really help you.
Peter:If I were in my house alone and saw a child outside who was obviously too young to be unaccompanied, I'd immediately call 911
What is this "obviously too young"? How young does the kid have to be before you can call the police simply because of the fact that the kid is there, walking like he is going somewhere? Remember that stopping the kid and asking him if anything is wrong has already been ruled out of the question.
As sort of a flip side, I've heard that parents are advised to tell their small children that if they ever become separated from a parent in a public place like a store, to go to the first woman they see and ask for help.
Gavin de Becker gives this advice for parents in his books, and it is indeed a very sensible one. (Sexism can sometimes be sensible.)
His other advice to parents is to drop the whole idea of "don't talk to strangers", since this advice only sounds good but is useless for a small child who can't really obey it, and replace it with "talk to strangers", that is, teach the kid actively to look for help from people who are statistically bound to be safe (e.g. women) instead of waiting for the predator to come to him.
I'd try to see if I could get one of the women neighbors to come out,
This works if you are in your own neighbourhood and know the people there.
Anonymous: How about stopping the kid
As I said, completely out of the question. I don't want to end up as a headline in tomorrow's paper, saying that an unidentified white male suspect tried to grab a kid who then ran away.
Even if you don't actually literally "grab" the kid, anything can happen when the little kid later tells his parents that a big strange man tried to ask him to stop. "Did he ask yo to come with you?" "I guess..."
Yes, I have seen reports in the newspaper in which the suspected child abductor only talked to the kid, and this was enough to make him a suspected abductor in the paper.
and phoning the police?
That's a good idea, assuming that I carried a cell phone with me. I guess I should start.
Posted by Ilkka Kokkarinen | 6:05 PM
anonymous (3:37 PM) asks:
Sad logic from Mr Kokkarinen, how about informing authorities or hanging around to see nothing really happens. What if she/he would be your own child to be left walkig to highway and die.
Well, you know, I always knew exactly where my children were, and the schools I sent them too knew as well.
Indeed, helping people can be positively dangerous.
A number of years ago I was in my car in the middle of three lanes of traffic travelling at 60 kph when all of a sudden the car next to me started slowing down and I saw a body bounding off the hood of the car.
We all stopped, and the young woman who had bounced off the car got up and headed for the median strip in a dazed manner, and was clearly going to try to cross the stream of traffic coming in the opposite direction. How she had believed she could get to the middle I don't know.
Anyway after yelling stop her, which no one could hear because my windows were up, I got out of the car, ran to her, stopped her, and turned her around and got her back to the side of the road and organized people to call the police and ambulances and get her a blanket and warm tea, since she was clearly suffering concussion.
Now, in my hast to stop her and turn her around, one hand touched one of her breasts.
Because of the possibility of being accused of sexual assault I will never help a female who is not my relative in any situation in future. Simply too dangerous.
Posted by beenaround | 7:06 PM
Then there are the airlines that assume single men sitting next to unaccompanied minors are an grave danger to the minor.
Eg, Qantas and Air NZ.
Posted by beenaround | 7:08 PM
Get real, people. Helping a child is not going to get you to jail, at least in any nation with any meaning of law and common sense, of North Korea and Mauritania I'm not sure about. What's the charge going to be? "Standing next to a minor in public"? I can think of several countries, however, where NOT helping a lost toddler will get you charged with something.
Posted by Anonymous | 4:31 PM
Anonymous says:
I can think of several countries, however, where NOT helping a lost toddler will get you charged with something.
Well, name them then, or are you all bluster?
Besides, I imagine that any charges would only apply if someone knew you failed to help ... in which case counter accusations could be made.
Posted by beenaround | 5:10 PM
Well, name them then, or are you all bluster?
Finland, for sure. I'm pretty sure that Sweden and Norway which have similar laws too. Actually, can you name a country where it is OK to see someone in danger and not help him?
Posted by Anonymous | 9:47 AM
Actually, can you name a country where it is OK to see someone in danger and not help him?
Are you asking whether it is legally OK or morally OK?
Secondly, that is a very broad question. If I saw someone in a burning building, I don't believe any country whose law us based on English common law would require you to put yourself in danger to help.
Secondly, to be charged, someone else has to have observed you. Your defence can very easily be that you thought that the person doing the observing was going to help (by calling emergency services or whatever ...).
Posted by beenaround | 5:34 PM