Protecting Children from Bad News.

DigForVictory

I don't think you can protect children from the news - but you can try to control printed matter. Mum got both medical journals & human rights publications - dad gagged a bit over the former (we were just fascinated in an abstract way) but the human rights thing had mans' inhumanity to man a bit clearly.
When you've seen a photo of a torso with head arms & legs chopped off - it sticks.

As for taking a small child to any televised event relating to a missing or dead child? I do not understand why that seems like a good idea.

Goldiegirl

Kynthia wrote: »

I think they had the untrained volunteers looking for clues in open ground that had already been searched. The scenes I saw only had the trained personnel looking through undergrowth and shrubbery.

TBH, when I saw all those people walking along, I thought if there was any evidence there, it'd have been trampled and destroyed.

It seemed like a media circus too, with all the reporters interviewing the searchers. It was more like the police we being seen to do something, rather than a real search.

I don't think the police thought for a minute that the untrained searchers would find anything - that's why the kids were allowed to be there. If there was any danger of anything being found, the kids would not have been allowed anywhere near.

But, even so, it wasn't an appropriate place to take a small child

Once children reach the age of 5 or 6, they will notice what's going on in the world, but younger than that, unless if affects them personally, small children don't need to know all the details about all the bad news in the world.

It got me thinking about my childhood. One of the things I vividly remember is the Aberfan disaster of 1966. Children the same age as me went to school and never came home. I suppose my parents could have stopped me watching TV and hidden the newspapers from me. But, I respect them for allowing me to learn about life and death. It was the first time I had thought about the fact that we don't live forever. Maybe a bit heavy for a 6 year old, but it was a something I had to learn sometime. I grew up a bit in October 1966. Something those children in Aberfan never did. I remember them each year.

Janepig

ilikepinacolada wrote: »

I totally understand the close relatives laying a tribute where the person concerned met its end although personally I would do so graveside but I do understand that but a total stranger laying a teddy and note with "You are in heaven now" so in bad taste!

I can also never understand (and you can bet your life it will happen when the Mother (who has now been charged) is taken to Court) when people who have no connection with the victim, turn up at Court to throw things and shout abuse at the prison van taking the accused to and from Court. Why would you do that when it's none of your business?

I remember when I was about 5, the daughter of a local shopkeeper who was friendly with my parents went missing (she was about 15) and afew days later my mother was bringing me back from infant school and we bumped into the father and he told her that they'd found his daughter's body that day, she'd been murdered (not by a family member I hasten to add). I can remember that like it was yesterday. And also when I was 8 a classmate died when his house caught fire. That's imprinted on my brain, but no-one ever talked about it and I was convinced our house would catch fire for years after that. It was almost like it never happened and he never existed. And I remember being hugely disturbed by the Yorkshire Ripper and the IRA, but again it wasn't something that was ever discussed.

They actually set aside time in DD/DS's school to discuss the current news in their individual classrooms so there's no chance of hiding much because someone else will bring up a topic and it'll be discussed.

Jx

msb5262

Interesting discussion...
when that poor little girl April was first missing, a primary school near me (not in Wales, I must add) asked all the children to wear pink "to support the search for April". It struck me as incredibly inappropriate at the time, and as events unfolded further, it became even more so. Why do people do this? I can't imagine how it could help in any way and I found it very worrying.

minimoneysaver

Hmm I've struggled with this more recently. When Lee Rigby was so horribly killed, my daughter and I were watching the news. For the first time ever I ever so quickly reached for the remote and turn over the tv. There is NO need ever for a child to witness what was shown by the BBC on the 6pm news that evening. I felt compelled to complain about the lack of thought about what was broadcast. Since then I don't put on the six o'clock news...sad but true.

Padstow

thorsoak wrote: »

Three years ago this weekend,my OH died. Our grandchildren had known since before Christmas that their Grampy was very sick and the doctors were trying to make him better.

After the funeral, and I was driving 2 granddaughters somewhere, 5 year old, said to me "XXX (her 8 year old sister) gets very sad when she thinks about Grampy, but I know what happens" "what's that?" I asked - "well, she said, the doctors couldn't get Grampy better, he came home from hospital but you couldn't make him better - so he's gone to heaven where God can make him better. And I know what heaven's like - its like Disney - and Grampy liked Disney when we went there - so I 'spect he's going on all the best rides"!

Sniffing, her 8 year old sister agreed. Me? I was trying to concentrate on driving and not letting the tears fall!. Later that evening, they decided that Grampy must now be a star, and were trying to work out which one was him .....trouble was - they kept picking on moving planes!

They do work things out, if you give them the information that they can cope with.

All you have related is normal. Part of the circle of life and being a family.

My question relates to a child's peer being found dead through unnatural means. Also should you take your own kids to search for them and then lay tributes when found dead? Totally different.

I might add that the volunteers who turned up were lead well away from the investigation. A search line across an open space was to appease them. They didn't know that. Their child, to them, could have found a body.

ifstar

I don't agree with children going to the searches, although I can imagine the parents wanted to feel like they were able to help but the parents probably didn't know there was no chance of them not finding anything. Seeing a recently passed dead body in a house is completely different to seeing one that has been outdoors or dead for a few days and something most adults couldn't cope with let alone children.


I do find it admirable that people wanted to spare their time and do their part and help in some way, it does show that a tragedy can bring a community together.

Padstow

mortgagenomore wrote: »

I would imagine the police would not have let mothers and young kids search if they suspected a body would be found, I suspect (as they do) they suspected foul play early on and went through the motions to get evidence, as someone mentioned they have their stewards in front searching, feel sad for people that searched thinking they would make a difference when it was all in vain!


I would think early on her story would not have rung true to police with the other siblings telling their stories, always ask a child eventually they will tell you the truth!

BIB, of course you are correct. Same for not allowing parents to search.
Sorry to say, but those wishing to search were diverting police from doing their job. Some had to guide volunteers to places where a body would never be. Mums, dads, kids and their dogs. Like a day out.

A little body is found and out come the teddies and Chinese Lanterns.
Tiny tots placing candles for the press to photograph.

Padstow

Goldiegirl wrote: »

TBH, when I saw all those people walking along, I thought if there was any evidence there, it'd have been trampled and destroyed.

It seemed like a media circus too, with all the reporters interviewing the searchers. It was more like the police we being seen to do something, rather than a real search.

I don't think the police thought for a minute that the untrained searchers would find anything - that's why the kids were allowed to be there. If there was any danger of anything being found, the kids would not have been allowed anywhere near.

But, even so, it wasn't an appropriate place to take a small child

Once children reach the age of 5 or 6, they will notice what's going on in the world, but younger than that, unless if affects them personally, small children don't need to know all the details about all the bad news in the world.

It got me thinking about my childhood. One of the things I vividly remember is the Aberfan disaster of 1966. Children the same age as me went to school and never came home. I suppose my parents could have stopped me watching TV and hidden the newspapers from me. But, I respect them for allowing me to learn about life and death. It was the first time I had thought about the fact that we don't live forever. Maybe a bit heavy for a 6 year old, but it was a something I had to learn sometime. I grew up a bit in October 1966. Something those children in Aberfan never did. I remember them each year.

Aberfan was a natural disaster, like Earthquakes.

How to explain Dunblane?

Goldiegirl

Padstow wrote: »

Aberfan was a natural disaster, like Earthquakes.

How to explain Dunblane?

I think everybody struggles to explain Dunblane, whatever age you are.

I suppose you'd have to try and explain that the man that did it was very ill in the head:(