Concern

newsgroup_monkey

chris_m wrote: »

So child abusers are always men are they?

The risk is pretty much the same irrespective of the lodger's gender.

Actually it's not. And I'm a fella.

Over 90% of !!!!!philes (don't get confused - !!!!!philia is about pre-pubescent children) are men. When we talk about convicted !!!!!philes by gender, it's very unlikely that it will be a woman doing it alone (less than 5% chance).

I guess there are a number of considerations when taking in a lodger - even taking someone on who is CRB cleared, it could mean they haven't been caught. However, if they also have a job which requires them to be squeaky clean (as I do), I guess the chances are low.

whiteroom184

thanks guys

my son will never be left alone, and has a child minder before and after school, the only time he would be here without me is in the company of his other parent

aliama

chris_m wrote: »

So child abusers are always men are they?

The risk is pretty much the same irrespective of the lodger's gender.

I'm sorry to hijack your thread, OP, but where on earth did you get that idea from? The risk really, really isn't the same. If the statistics you're looking at include neglect and non-sexual abuse then that may be the case, but that's not what I'm talking about here. While female sexual abusers do exist, the great majority are male. And the great majority of rapists are, guess what, male. Even when the victims are male too.

DRP

It is getting a little hysterical on this thread.

Let's be clear: the risk from any gender would be *extremely* low.

Presumably a lodger would be a working person, who would be vetted with references taken. In addition the child should never be left alone with a perfect stranger anyhow.

And finally, to end on a comforting thought - 90% of abuse is by a person the child trusts (about half of that by immediate family members) and only about 1/20 cases of child sexual abuse where the abuse is carried out by a total stranger.

paddyz

Depending on your house it might be possible to add a door to separate your bedrooms from lodger's bedroom,

Teachers and Medical staff, are all well checked and if me id go with a female lodger as risk would be lowered but never risk free and like others have said don't leave your child alone

Might be some gadgets available for a alarm on a bedroom door, also you can use a nanny cam.

G_M

Sorry folks - didn't think I'd stir up quite such a can of worms!

The point is not really about gender at all - it's about evaluating people, evaluating risk, being sensible.

Just_Keep_Swimming

My mum did this in a similar situation when I was 7.

Had a female lodger for a few months. After she moved out, we had a male lodger. Both perfectly lovely, and both were in the police force.

CupOfChai

Like others, if I had a young child to consider I'd prefer to choose someone in a job where they're likely to have been vetted, such as medical staff, teachers, police officers. Or do you have any employers locally who you know have tight security and do background checks on their employees? I used to work at one such place and lots of people in the local area liked to take people moving there to work at the company as lodgers, because it was known the company vetted its employees.

BitterAndTwisted

Considering the number of parents who move a new partner in with their family after knowing them for about five minutes and never, ever dream of carrying out any checks or "vetting" and the children don't come to any harm, I'd say that taking in a lodger who is never alone in the property with the child can be a fantastically low-risk decision. Unless said lodger is someone just plucked off the street at random and handed the keys.

Someone inviting anyone to live with them in their home should always do some basic research and take up references whether there's a child resident or not.