Safer, more afraid, or both?
After 27 years, police are saying definitively that Adam Walsh, son of America’s Most Wanted host John Walsh, was murdered by Ottis Toole, a “drifter” who later died in prison where he was serving time on other charges. The AP yesterday ran a story about how the senior Walsh’s conversion from hotel developer to prime-time crime fighter transformed the way American deals with missing persons cases:
Adam’s death…helped put missing children’s faces on milk cartons and in mailboxes, started fingerprinting programs and increased security at schools and stores.
It spurred the creation of missing persons units at every large police department. And it prompted legislation to create a national center, database and toll-free line devoted to missing children. It also prompted the television program “America’s Most Wanted,” hosted by John Walsh, which brought such cases into millions of homes.
“In 1981, when a child disappeared, you couldn’t enter information about a child into the FBI database. You could enter information about stolen cars, stolen guns but not stolen children,” said Ernie Allen, president of the Center for Missing and Exploited Children, which was co-founded by John Walsh. “Those things have all changed.”
I wasn’t aware of the technological/law enforcement advances spurred by Adam Walsh’s murder. But I remember the first airing of America’s Most Wanted and have been amazed at its “no-brainer” effectiveness through the years. I mean, it’s like the old post office wanted posters on steroids — a really simple, why-didn’t-we-think-of-that-sooner? concept.
Of course, every activist has his critics. Still, reading further in the AP story, I was surprised to see a university sociologist accusing John Walsh of stoking unreasonable fear among kids and parents:
Others are more hesitant to dole out credit. John Walsh’s efforts, said Mount Holyoke College sociologist and criminologist Richard Moran, have made children and adults exponentially more afraid of the world.
“He ended up really producing a generation of cautious and afraid kids who view all adults and strangers as a threat to them and it made parents extremely paranoid about the safety of their children,” Moran said.
I started thinking about my own kids: One is very cautious and often worries about such things as child abduction. But I attribute that to the high profile San Diego case of David Westerfield, who snatched 7-year-old Danielle van Dam from her bedroom one night and murdered her. My son was about the same age at the time.
Read the AP story here. What do you think of Moran’s assessment of Walsh’s anti-crime activism? Is it reasonable for kids to be afraid, and for parents to be “paranoid” about their children’s safety? Is it Walsh’s fault that so many of us are?




Learn it! Speak it! Live it!
Bring Christmas to a child in need!








Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top36 Comments to “Safer, more afraid, or both?”
Adam’s abduction and murder were a sort of mini 9/11 for us all. All our vulnerabilities were vulnerabilities because perhaps we had no reason to think of “worst case” scenarios. I remember watching the TV movie about the Adam Walsh case. The John Walsh character’s frustration after he discovered how little the police could do to help him was superbly depicted. He happened to be at police HQ and saw a flurry of officers working to recover someone’s stolen pickup after others had told him there was nothing more they could do about his son.
And to this day when we see a kid alone in a crowded store my wife and I always ask him/her “Does your Mommy know where you are?” Kudos to WaLmart and other stores for their “code Adam” abduction procedures. Long ago I got lost and a non-employee adult at the downtown Penney’s store offered to help me find my Mom. Can’t imagine anyone doing that today. But also, at the playground when someone else’s kids ask me to push them in the swing I generally decline unless the parent is nearby and is someone I know. And at a recent tree-lighting ceremony at the Main Post chapel I demanded to see the ID of a man photographing the girls. (He worked for the Ft Polk Guardian newspaper, luckily).
Report comment to moderator
If you follow the line of reason all the way out that Walsh is responsible for our children being scared and parents being paranoid…well then he is responsible for all the obesity in America’s children.
On the other hand…
I definately put this in the better safe than sorry category.
Report comment to moderator
One thing I appreciate about department stores (even Wal-Pain does this) is if a parent cannot locate a child, they lock the store’s doors. This happened to a girlfriend of mine recently and thankfully her boy was hiding in a rack of clothes!
I heard of one story not too long after Adam’s abduction where a woman was missing her child and luckily they found him, but he was in the men’s bathroom with his to be abductors, and they had already dyed his hair within a matter of minutes!
The only thing I don’t like about America’s Most Wanted is their centralized government focus. While giving us an illusion of safety (as with Homeland Security and the Patriot Act) and actually succeeding in capturing over 1000 criminals, they’ve participated in the unconstitutional limiting of our states’ rights and freedoms through the promoting of mandatory DNA testing, etc. I know people here will disagree with me on this, for instance, probably Sister Victoria. And we’ve been getting along so well lately!
Report comment to moderator
I’m wondering how long before the USA will follow Britain’s lead. Across the pond not only do you have surveillance everywhere, but I believe nearly everyone submits a DNA sample to the local bobbies HQ.
Report comment to moderator
#2 Kim
I think paranoia does keep kids indoors if parents can’t be outside to watch’em. So you are partially correct. But high-fat processed foods and too much TV/nintendo time has a role as well.
Too bad more new homes don’t have a fence in the front yard as well
Report comment to moderator
John Walsh falls into my category of “too much of a good thing”. Stranger abductions are just so rare that anything more than good old 19th century common sense is all that is required. A few of us need to be reminded every so often, but many more of us are subject to hysterical over-reaction to exploitative, lurid warnings.
I have in mind a particular mother who lives in a $1 million+ gated subdivision in Northern Virginia who still won’t let her 14 and 12 year old kids go beyond the driveway without adult accompaniment.
I thought Walsh’s “America’s Most Wanted”, which went far beyond child abduction cases was interesting, perhaps even useful, but too breathless. Is it still running?
Report comment to moderator
Arcadia,
Yes.
Report comment to moderator
Arcadia,
I’m with you on this one. I put Walsh in the category of MADD and Ralph Nader.
btw, did the police find new evidence, or did they decide that it was simply time to close the case?
Report comment to moderator
Bianca – 3
So this is where you have been hiding out today?
YOU WRITE: “While giving us an illusion of safety (as with Homeland Security and the Patriot Act) and actually succeeding in capturing over 1000 criminals, they’ve participated in the unconstitutional limiting of our states’ rights and freedoms through the promoting of mandatory DNA testing, etc. I know people here will disagree with me on this, for instance, probably Sister Victoria. And we’ve been getting along so well lately!”
When you speak of DNA testing, exactly what do you mean? – just so I don’t misunderstand -
Report comment to moderator
2 Kim, I agree with you on this – it is better to be safe than sorry.
Report comment to moderator
Victoria – Awhile back we were watching an episode where they did or were trying to get mandatory DNA testing for New Mexico. And there was talk about getting it implemented in all 50 states. My husband and I were discussing the show and saying that while this was something that NM wanted, other states should be able to opt into it, that it shouldn’t be forced on them from Washington.
Report comment to moderator
I was in college 27 years ago, never heard of Adam Walsh until yesterday – or John Walsh, though I had heard of (but never watched) “America’s Most Wanted.” I had only scanned the intro to the story about this yesterday, and assumed that Adam had been abducted because his father was the host of that show (presumably in retaliation for someone getting caught because of it). My reaction at the moment is relief that it was the other way around, that the show was a result of the abduction.
Taking reasonable precautions makes sense. Most parents I know do that. It’s one of the first things we teach in Cub Scouts. Being paranoid and not letting kids out of your sight/out of your yard does not make sense and is not good for the child. I don’t know anyone who does that.
Maybe it’s where I live. When we moved to the Midwest (from New Jersey) I felt like we had gone through a time warp to a decade or two earlier. I know there is crime in our community, but from the times I’ve looked at the police news in the paper, it is primarily drug-related and domestic violence. I know there’s no such thing as being 100% safe, but I don’t worry about my kids’ safety.
Report comment to moderator
Regarding the last sentence of my post #12, please note that I used the word “worry” intentionally. I am concerned about my kids’ safety and we take what I consider reasonable precautions. But I’m not worrying about it.
Report comment to moderator
Bianca
I certainly would NOT condone or vote for such a thing – that goes way beyond the governments rights -
Report comment to moderator
Scott,
According to what I saw/read (local/web news), the guy had always been their only suspect, but he falsely confessed to many murders. At least two key pieces of evidence were lost, but he gave a deathbed confession to a niece in 1996. Not sure why she waited (or if) a decade+ with the information.
Report comment to moderator
I’m with the POV that we’ve done a harmful thing to make both parents and children so scared. Statistics show that it’s actually *safer* now than it was 30 years ago, but parents are acting more and more paranoid which in turn is affecting more and more children. “Better safe than sorry”?? I think it’s a sorry thing that this generation of children is so nervous and lacks the confidence to walk five blocks to a grocery store, buy some things for mom and walk home. Without a cell phone.
I love this website: http://www.freerangekids.com … this mom left her 9yo son in NYC with some money and a bus pass and had him make his way home to the ‘burbs on his own (this was the kids’ idea BTW). He did it, she wrote about it in a newspaper, and boy, howdy did she catch heck. But she also found a group of parents who want their kids to have a little more freedom to learn and grow than we’ve been led to believe is wise.
Report comment to moderator
Cameron,
That’s pretty much the version I heard, too. I was wondering (hoping?) if someone had heard a different story, one with a more satisfying ending.
Report comment to moderator
My kids don’t have as much freedom to roam as I did as a child, but they do have a pretty wide area of the neighborhood in which to roam. If we lived in town, that might be different.
On a related theme, while I appreciate the sex offender registries being posted so parents know who’s nearby, I wish the term was defined more carefully. Maybe with some sort of explanation as to the offense (serial, strangers, abductions, 40 years ago, etc…)
Those who aren’t a threat anymore shouldn’t have to stay on the list. I think the motivation was admirable, but it’s time for some fine-tuning, IMHO.
Report comment to moderator
I think the paranoia comes at least partially from the fact that most people move around more now and don’t know their neighbors as well (or at all) as they did decades ago.
The show, as well as news coverage, certainly contributes, as well.
Report comment to moderator
I firmly believe in the “buddy system”, for kids & even many adults (such as young women).
Perhaps stranger-abduction is rare, but don’t forget about rape & molestation. Those happen all too frequently. And many kids don’t tell because of the threats of the perpetrators.
Report comment to moderator
We live in town and I’ve had to make myself loosen up. Our 15yo can now walk to a church more than a mile away to use their library (all neighborhoods, near campus). If our 12yo and 10 yo daughters go together they can go to the store six blocks away.
We live right across the street from a park. The play equipment is around a building, out of my sight from the front room of the house. For the first two years we lived here I didn’t let the kids go to the play equipment without me. Then I started reading the Free Range Kids website (and from personal conviction as well) and now there’s more freedom to head over there without me.
But just writing that irritates me. When I was a kid we biked all OVER town — to the elementary school more than a mile away to play; to the library downtown; to the lady who cut hair two miles out in the country (no sidewalks to ride on! Dogs!), etc. In the summers we’d see our parents in the morning, at noon, and then sometime around dinner time. Other than that we’d be out with friends or siblings having a good time.
I miss that for my kids. But I’m learning.
I think 24 hour news shows, the internet and the like have caused this paranoia.
Report comment to moderator
Another source of over-protection by parents stems from all the gov’t-sponsored emphasis on safety. Think helmets for riding bikes, immunizations for EVERYTHING, laws about babysitter ages, etc.
Parenting has become regulated to the extreme, and parents are paranoid not just of their child being hurt, but of running afoul of some rule, bringing accusations from some social worker, followed by the taking of said child from the family.
I know parents who are afraid to let their kids climb trees, shoot BBs, hammer anything, chop wood, etc. because the child MIGHT get hurt, and the parents would face inquiries about the injury. The fear-based parenting comes from a society obsessed with PREVENTION of anything negative at all costs, including freedom and innovation.
Report comment to moderator
MomOf5 you’re right — I hadn’t even gone there yet, lol. When our 15yo son was high up in a tree recently at a church barbecue at the pastor’s house, I had to BITE my tongue to keep from telling him to “Be careful!” or “Come down!” And I think I did more good by not saying anything than by being “better safe than sorry” and telling him to come down.
Something that makes you go “Hmmmm” is that many, many more kids die in the car during routine travel than have been raped or murdered. Yet we still drive our kids around. Why is that? Why do we continue to drive them in a car when it’s so very dangerous? Yet we won’t even let them walk 8 blocks to the library by themselves even though this is much safer?
Report comment to moderator
20 – Yes, even for adults! There was a lot of wisdom in our Lord sending his disciples out two by two.
Report comment to moderator
Endyblue,
Good for you!
Social workers think that riding in cars is still okay–so no guilt if that goes wrong. But accidents while playing? Those should be prevented. (Hence the popularity of video games and other bottom-sitting activities. They might get chunky, but they’ll be safe!)
Sadly, the parents who yield to this pressure to over-protect end up training their children to be afraid of adventures and challenges.
Unintended consequences.
Report comment to moderator
20, 24
The buddy system is what we do. That would be tougher with only kids, or in families where there are big age differences between the children. With good neighbors, though, the buddy system could work even then.
Report comment to moderator
#6
Arcadia,
I haven’t yet read the whole thread, but I think you’re 100% right. Stranger abduction is SO unusual, that it still gets on the national news. We do have a generation of paranoid, frightened parents and children. There are NO more abductions statistically than there were in the past, but we HEAR about them now, and people think an abductor is hiding behind every bush.
Problem is, I find myself included in the “paranoid and frightened.” I KNOW that the likelihood of such an abduction with only a small amount of training and care is VERY unlikely. BUT, if it were to happen, would I ever forgive myself?
I let my kids play around my neighborhood unsupervised barring keeping an “ear” out and asking them to check in once in awhile. I have a friend who is beyond APPALLED at this. She thinks my kids are in mortal danger.
But, my kids don’t just get on their bikes and say “bye” until the end of the day as my brother did or as my parents did. I am very careful with them compared to many others, and most people would actually call me over-protective.
I figure as long as I am “balancing” in the middle, I am probably being more-or-less reasonable.
I don’t know how to put the Genie back into the bottle. I think that John Walsh did a lot of good, but — as Arcadia said — too much of a good thing. The changes in police departments were wonderful. Many other changes have done a lot of good.
But, the virtual “prisons” many of us have created for our kids because “better safe than sorry” has most definitely created a generation of fat, fearful, never unsupervised for a second kids.
Report comment to moderator
Otis Toole– the confessed killer of little Adam Walsh–was a homosexual partner to another serial killer drifter named Henry Lee Lucas. No one is equating these men with mainstream homosexuals although the boundary between the two could blur. A legal adult homosexual in the right setting could easily become involved with one of his charges. But the point to made here is the homo is no total stranger to the child as Toole was to young Adam. Toole said he lured the child out of the store with a promise of candy out in his car.
My understanding was Adam’s mother had taken him to a Sears and said something like “Now you wait here by the ? while I go look at XYZ.” Youngsters have such a poor time concept to start with and I dont know if Adam even knew how to tell time or had a watch. I dont know anyone today who would let a single child at Adam’s age stay put without some sort of threat (stay here or else!)And heaven forfend if the child should have to go to the potty with a parent nowhere around.
As a father I’ve always hated having to take my daughters into any public restroom, but again its best to be safe.
I’ve never heard of any child abductor’s being women.
Report comment to moderator
I do think there’s a difference in a neighborhood with lots of kids and lots of mothers at home, and one that’s virtually empty. That said, there are many good reasons for giving kids a bit more freedom than they usually have today. (Some of these come from a book that seems to handle this subject with great wisdom–I believe it’s called Protecting the Gift, but I can’t find it on my shelf to verify that–and some are from my own observation. Keep in mind, as I’m sure I’ll soon be reminded, that I’m not a parent.)
First, this author said the dumbest advice ever given to kids is, “If you’re lost, find a cop.” First, cops aren’t that common; second, kids can’t tell the difference between a cop and a security guard, and security guards are frequently ex-cons and high on the list of murderers–the very last person you want your child seeking out when he’s lost. He says don’t tell lost kids to find a cop, tell them to find a woman–nearly any woman will take the time to drop everything and make sure this kid is safe. A man can’t do so as readily (because our society is nervous about men and children), but many times I’ve stopped just to be sure that a “loose” kid has a parent around; I’d certainly pay attention if a kid came to me asking for help.
Now, some reasons that “stranger-danger” fear hurts kids, and that overall it has done more harm than it’s worth:
-Studies have shown that the training doesn’t even work. Kids who’ve been trained very carefully will still go with a stranger to find a lost puppy, even if they’re specifically warned of that specific lure. (The book reported on a specific study that tested this; mothers walked with open mouths as their well-trained children took the stranger’s bait.) It’s far better to train kids in discernment about talking to strangers (let them practice, within the parents’ view, finding a safe person of whom to ask a question) than to simply tell them the blatantly false, “Strangers are dangerous.”
-Kids’ social skills, confidence, and discernment are all hampered if they believe the stranger-danger line. If they don’t believe it, if their gregariousness overcomes adult cautions, then they’re constantly being nagged to rein in their friendly impulses.
-Kids who don’t have good social skills with adults are hampered as they head into the workplace. Their respect for authority is also going to be limited, if the message they’ve gotten from infancy is “Adults (esp. male adults) are dangerous.”
-Kids who veer away from adults out of fear are more peer-dependent . . . a more real danger, and of legitimate concern to Christian parents, than the mild danger of stranger abduction.
-Most abductions (and molestations and other crimes against children) are committed by people known by the child. Focusing on strangers is quite simply focusing on the wrong place. Focus on what actions are inappropriate, not what people are.
I remember being told as a child, “Virtually any child can outrun any adult. If you need to get away from someone, just run–he cannot catch you.” And my mom told me she would never, never send anyone to my school to pick me up unless she’d told me ahead of time she was doing so, with the exceptions of these specific people: my next-door neighbor and my older brothers. Anyone else who said Mom had sent him, no matter what the story or how well I knew the person, was lying. If she absolutely had to send someone to my school to pick me up, she’d send one of these people. I also was to stay where I was (and not seek my parents) if I ever found myself separated from them in the store–they would find me. A few basic rules like this are wise. “Don’t talk to strangers” is simply useless, and breeds distrustful children.
Report comment to moderator
Cheryl D,
I think the advice given to our younger son in school and Cub Scouts is much more along the lines of what you have said. When our older son was about 4 or 5, I had him with me in the grocery store one day, and when the clerk asked him how he was doing, he refused to answer. Later he explained that she was a stranger so he couldn’t talk to her. So I helped him understand that as long as he was with a trusted adult it was OK.
When we went through the Cub Scout safety training we talked about specific scenarios. What if a stranger tells you Mom sent him to get you? What if he asks you to help him find a lost pet? What if someone in a public restroom asks you to take your pants down? And we also went over the situations where it was OK to talk to a stranger, because he was with a parent or teacher or some other adult he already knew and trusted.
I did wonder if I’d done the right thing, one time when I let someone I didn’t know take him to school. I had just been in an accident while taking him to school, and the person who pulled over to make sure we were OK said he worked at the school and could take him so he didn’t have to wait with me till the police came. I recognized the security badge he was wearing (one of those cards you swipe to have the door open) as that of school district employees, and decided that was reasonable enough evidence he was who he said he was. I figured if I refused to let my son go with him it would be reinforcing the wrong kind of fear of strangers to my son.
Report comment to moderator
Life is dangerous. Any of us can be struck down at any time, any place, by any mishap. A disease, a stray bullet, violence from a stranger or a loved one. None of us is safe. My daughter had a bizarre, very rare, medical condition which struck suddenly when she was 14. She was treated and survived. She was mugged on a London street when she was in college. She broke free and got away.
An aunt-in-law of mine was murdered when I was young. My wife and I took a furniture making class 45 years ago. Another young couple in the class had a toddler kidnapped and murdered, similar to the Adam Walsh story.
Everyone of my four siblings and my wife’s four siblings have survived fine to a fairly ripe old age.
Some places are more dangerous than others. Somalia and Sudan are like something out of Mad Max. Imagine living in Iraq (now “safer”) or Afghanistan. We worry about Mexicans sneaking across our border and the threat to our way of life. What about Tijuana and other border areas of lawless Mexico, where anybody can be kidnapped, killed, tortured, raped at any time by narco-terrorists and creatures that can hardly be called human?
Most of the comments in this thread are fairly sensible about children. The mommies try to hit a reasonable balance with our granddaughter between safety and security and between teaching her to be watchful and careful and letting her be a normal, carefree child. She doesn’t wander the streets with the casual freedom my wife and I did as children. On the other hand, the mommies live in a friendly, diverse, multi-racial urban neighborhood where most of the people know each other and keep an eye out for each other.
By the way, watch out for the meteoroid 3 light years or so away. Also, while you weren’t looking, bird flu popped again in China. Who remembers 1919? My wife and I are getting chickens and ducks next year.
More than 370,000 chickens have been culled in China’s eastern province of Jiangsu after an outbreak of the H5N1 strain of bird flu, say officials.
The outbreak is thought to be the first in mainland China since June.
Meanwhile, a man has reportedly contracted the virus in Cambodia, while Taiwan is investigating suspected infection among birds.
The death of a teenage girl from H5N1 was announced in Egypt on Tuesday, and a bird cull is also under way in India.
More than 200 people in a dozen countries have died of the virus since it resurfaced in Asia in 2003, say global health authorities.
BBC news
Report comment to moderator
too much of a good thing
we have nothing to fear but fear itself.
Fear is being used to erode liberty and increase the likelihood people will accept limits on their freedom. The ploy succeeds and will succeed even more in the future as children who grew up in fear will become adults.
Report comment to moderator
Life is dangerous. Any of us can be struck down at any time, any place, by any mishap. A disease, a stray bullet, violence from a stranger or a loved one. None of us is safe.
This is true, but as horrible as the thought is of one of my children dying young from a disease or from a stray bullet, it’s far more bearable than the thought of one of them being abducted, sexually molested, and murdered. Still, I never raised them to be fearful of strangers. I’ve exercised what I believe to be reasonable caution, and by the grace of God, nothing horrible has happened to them.
Report comment to moderator
33 – so true. It breaks my heart when I think of little Adam’s (or any child) last moments scared and alone with a pervert. If your child dies from an illness, you can at least hold him. But when you can’t even get to him because some pervert has him… my goodness the grace a parent would have to be given to get through that kind of tragedy. God can give that grace and does, but what suffering. I can’t imagine it.
Report comment to moderator
I have a friend who has rather protective parents. She’s not allowed to walk my dog with me in my neighborhood, for fear that she could be abducted. On the other hand, I have a friend who is terrified of being kindapped, for the simple reason that she’s been nearly abducted thrice by three separate people. Are parents too paranoid? Yes. Is there some reason to be paranoid? Yes. Moderation in all things is the key here. Personally, I will continue to organize swordplay matches between the kids on my street while keeping an eye on my little sister, and jousting with my babysitting charges while making sure that baby is in a safe place, well-occupied.
Report comment to moderator
I always tell people, I’m not paranoid. I’m awaranoid!
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!