Children are much more likely to be sexually assaulted by family members and trusted friends than strangers. We don't like to think about that though, so we redirect our fears to stranger danger.
But is it possible that part of the reason crime is down is because of Stranger Danger?
Yes. This is a really soft question. Sure, part of the reason that crime is down could possibly be due to stranger danger.
On the flip side, over-parenting has negative consequences on kids who have no freedom. I believe the same poll had said that most kids had never walked down a grocery store aisle by themselves and weren't allowed to play outside in front of their house w/o a parent.
Comments
I’m not saying you’re wrong, or that I disagree that Stranger Danger is overblown.
But is it possible that part of the reason crime is down is because of Stranger Danger?
I’m not suggesting it is, just that I can’t say with certainty that it isn’t.
Yes, that is a good question. It is generally answered in longer form treatments, like Skenazy's "Free Range Kids" book.
The answer is that the rate of crime on kids committed outside by strangers is down, even after you adjust for less time outside.
Children are much more likely to be sexually assaulted by family members and trusted friends than strangers. We don't like to think about that though, so we redirect our fears to stranger danger.
Yes. This is a really soft question. Sure, part of the reason that crime is down could possibly be due to stranger danger.
On the flip side, over-parenting has negative consequences on kids who have no freedom. I believe the same poll had said that most kids had never walked down a grocery store aisle by themselves and weren't allowed to play outside in front of their house w/o a parent.