One in four children has put themselves in potential danger by secretly meeting strangers they have contacted online, a disturbing Government report shows.

Of those, 69 per cent took a child friend along, risking their safety as well, and 25 per cent went alone. Only six per cent took an adult.

The figure, from an official survey of 6,000 children aged between 11 and 16, is a three-fold increase on a similar study carried out two years ago.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...in_page_id=1770

This proves that students in schools around the world need more schooling and education regarding the web at school to prevent incidents such as these which as we seen in the past can lead to serious harm to children.
James

i have to admitt...when I was younger (and a lot stupider) I'd meet people offline...and I'd always bring one of my friends along...We were lucky to never be in a bad situation...but looking back, I can't believe how stupid it was...and how my parents really had no idea.

If you're planning to meet an Internet stranger, do it in a nice public place with your friends. There are plenty of nice people on the Internet, my friends wouldn't label me as a pedophile just because I use the Internet.

We didn't meet with friends though. We actually met in the alley way behind your grandparent's house.

That's ridiculous advice. Your best bet is not to meet someone you've met on the internet. What difference does it make if you friends would label you a pedophile or not? No one said you're a pedophile if you use the internet; the point was that children have put themselves at risk by secretly meeting people that they've found online, and chances are those people are pedophiles if they're secretly arranging to meet children.

true....but anyone who's that much older than a child shouldn't be a friend....a 10 year old (or all the way up to 16) shouldn't have adult "friends" (i can concede that an 18 yeard old and a 16 year old probably have enough in common to hang out)....why in the world would an adult want to visit with a child unless you already know that child's parents and are friends with them....

The article is borderline irresponsible. Was this scientific research or a questionaire? "Stranger" could use a better definition. A friend of a friend might be a stranger and pose little/no risk. A relative you have never met could be considered a stranger depending on the wording of the question. I'd like to know if the "stranger" was older, younger, or about the same age as the youngster being questioned. And most important - 6000 kids interviewed - 25% (1500) engaged in this "dangerous" activity. The next LOGICAL question for the 1500, "were you at any time during the encounter with the stranger exposed to danger." It is important for the responder to answer from the perspective of "real" danger, not a feeling or perception. Failing to collect that data set enables phobia alarmists to perpetuate the myth of danger without collecting the exact (and apparently readily available) data that would support their conclusion.

This post has been edited by TaterState: Sep 10 2007, 10:29 AM

Research is asking questions or questioning known information, amongst other things, so to write the entire thing off because it the data was determined as a result of questions is a peculiar take on it

The importance of it, is that it highlights the number of parents who don't know their children are doing this

I was brought up with do not talk to strangers ringing in my ears

and a friend of a friend is incapable of causing your child harm? or a rellative you've never met? a child meeting ANYONE in person that they met on the internet without their parent's knowledge or consent is dangerous...no matter if they're meeting with the pope....something could happen and no one would know where they are....the ROOT of this issue is parental knowledge and consent...not the "could happens" or the "probabilities" involved

I think the larger picture here is the absence of "good" parenting. True caring parents would be aware of any conversations their children have on the internet and intercept it before they had a chance to even try and meet. No my son will not meet people he does not know on the internet, period.
In todays world their is a majority or parents who just dont care, now I know this is a tough concept because everything I have read from people here seem like they have a good handle on their kids. BUT alot of people out there dont spend the time.
I have spent alot of time working in middle to high end homes, doing painting and window fashions as a side job to help out family. All I see is detached parents with nannies that are watching their children and I mean up to 15 yrs old, just to make sure they dont blow something up.
But that doesnt stop them from using the internet to do what they please, becuase they all have tvs, radios, cd players, dvd players, computers, and laptops in their rooms.
Now if your an adult and meet someone than thats your right and I wont impose on it, but as a child meeting someone, that responsibility lays solely with the parents and their failure to do whats right.
This subject is frustrating to me because I feel like so many kids could be spared a life of terrible things if they just had parents who cared, paid attention, and said NO instead of giving in to their kids.

Kids are kids and will try things that they think is ok, but for cryin out loud, the parents should be jailed and the kids put somewhere where they will be protected.

Keith, I don't write off the entire article. In fact, the opening four paragraphs are good with the exception of the word "mere" in the fourth paragraph. These four paragraphs tell much of our society today. Following that, readers areled to conclusions not supported by the research.

I wholeheartedly advise all parents to be vigilant based on changes to the social fabric.

I don't see anywhere that it leads to conclusions, it has points which indicate possible ramifications, which could arise from children meeting adults without the knowledge of their parents

Why would an adult suggest a meeting to a child without asking their parents first

dsenette, Please don't beat me up for statements I didn't make. Parental involvement is key here. Safety for Children is very important to me as I have 3. The hyped article leads readers to see the encounters as child-adult and dangerous. Also, data on the encounters was either not collected or not reported, leading readers to a faulty conclusion.

Please note that many responders here are using the word "parent" which is strangely missing from the article.

i would assume that without the stuff in the middle...that this is the heart of your post...in that the article (in your oppinion) is irresponsible and could cause some "alarmist" reaction that in some way would be invalid...correct reading of your purpose? what's the "myth of danger" involved in the article?

the article is a display of numerical data aquired through research that shows a patern observed among today's youth...it's not an article about the failure of parents in modern society or anything of that nature....just the representation of a (justifiably) alarming trend