Would you let a teenage boy babysit your preschool girl?

[Anonymous]

I totally understand the logic of moms who would allow a girl but not a boy to babysit their children. They have statistics showing that boys are more likely than girls to commit a sex offense, so they think that logic justifies their decision. Following that same logic, I refuse to allow any women to drive me or my family anywhere, because women are more likely to get into auto accidents than men (http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/19980516133725data_trunc_sys.shtml).

I'm obviously being facetious, but that's the result your logic implies.

[Anonymous]

And by the same logic you would not allow your boyfriend or husband to be alone with your child, because boyfriends and husbands have the highest incidence of shaken-baby syndrome.

[Anonymous]

New PP here (female). I met a boy in college who, at the age of 8, was asked and did perform oral sex on his male babysitter. I will never forget that boy and how screwed up he was (as a college age individual). And I will never forget that, though I was a much-loved and responsible babysitter to many families as a teen, I had horrible impulse control when I was a teenager and young adult. For me, the impulse control issues manifested as activities harmful to myself rather than others but I think other teens could have trouble with impulse control in a way that harms others or at least puts others at risk. For these reasons, I will be very careful in picking teen babysitters and in defining the scope of their duties (if I ever do use them). I do tend to think that I will probably not use a male teenager babysitter--the boy from college has made me completely biased and wedded to stereotype in this case even though I know rationally that that one boy's experience does not represent all possibilities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And by the same logic you would not allow your boyfriend or husband to be alone with your child, because boyfriends and husbands have the highest incidence of shaken-baby syndrome.

I think that women are more often responsible for shaken babies.

[Anonymous]

I would have to know the boy really, really well to feel comfortable with it. The gender of my child wouldn't matter.

I was told by a mental health professional that there is A LOT more child molestation by teenage boys against young children than ever before, due primarily to the internet. Kids surf the internet, see some stuff because they are teenagers and curious, get desensitized to it, and then proceed to act out what they've seen. They aren't pedophiles; this isn't behavior that would carry over into adulthood. It's based almost entirely on experimentation and opportunity.

[Anonymous]

The inherent problem with this question is that it courts stereo types. Asking if we would allow "a teenage boy" is a very different question than if we would allow John Doe, who has lived next door and we have known for years, who is a sweetheart and great with kids, watch your child.

Obviously, in a generic way, most people wouldn't pick the stereotype of "teenage boy" as a sitter. But once you humanize that idea, make it a real person who you can meet and get a sense of, the hesitations will recede by a lot.

So, would a teenage boy be my first pic? Probably not. But if I knew a child, such as my friend's son who I have known for 12 years, then yes, I would feel comfortable.

[Anonymous]

I would not allow a teenage boy to babysit my preschool girl, and when my DS becomes a teenager, I will not let him watch preschool girls either.

-Dad

[Anonymous]

The comment about women getting into more accidents is not analogous. Almost all sex offenders are men. If you look up the sex offender reigstry, which I have, it is about 99% men. I would not allow my pre-school aged child to be alone in the company of any of my friend's husbands, as it is just unnecessary. While the risk may not be that high, the potential harm is tremendous, and it can be easily avoided given that almost ALL sex child predators are men. Not only that, it protects the men. There are incidences where children are confused or actually prompted to make up stories about abuse. I agree with the dad about not allowing his son to babysit.

That being said, you have to make your own judgments about the people in your life. Just as I of course trust my daughter with my husband, the OP must make a decison about her neighbor's son. But, when it comes to people who you are not intimately familiar with, you should be cautious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dad here. I find this thread terribly disturbing. I babysat kids even at the age of 11 and we've had both teenage boy and girl sitters for our son. They're all great kids. A lot of you moms are engaging in some pretty reprehensible gender stereotyping. You'd be appalled if a man made generalizations about girls/women (like, why hire a woman when she's only going to get pregnant and leave at some point...) but many of you are doing just that with respect to boys/men. Pretty appalling.

Not all of us are paraniod misandrists as some of these posters. You sound like my husband who I mentioned earlier. Male babysitters make the BEST partners! And also make for pretty fun babysitters.

These same women who are aghast at the thought of a male babysitter are probably the same ones chronically bitching and complaining about how their husbands never help around the house, when they are the ones nourishing sterotypes and outdated gender roles.

In my case, this is not true. I posted earlier that I would NEVER let a male (especially a teen) babysit my DD and DS. My dad was molested by a son of a family friend and I just couldn't do it considering the statistics of most sexual predators being male. As for my DH, he does at least 50% or more of the household and childcare duties and is a wonderful husband and father. He was not, however, interested as a teen in babysitting and didn't even like holding a baby. He has always said he thought it was strange that a teenage boy would be interested in babysitting.

[Anonymous]

I think this whole discussion flows from a logical/statistical fallacy. I'm sure there's a formal name for it, but I don't know what it is.

People are assuming that because teen boys are more likely than teen girls to commit sexual abuse (a claim I have not truth-checked, but which I assume is true), then teen boys must be less effective (more dangerous) babysitters. But this logic fails to examine how common/uncommon sexual abuse by teen boy babysitters is. I assume it happens some percentage of the time, but I suspect it's a lot rarer than people here are assuming. And the comparison of teen boy sexual abuse to teen girl sexual abuse, without any context for how often either occurs, makes this whole discussion meaningless.

For example (making these numbers up), let's pretend that statistics show that 2 in 100,000 times a teen boy babysits, he commits sexual abuse, while it's only 1 in 100,000 times for teen girls (so girls are half as likely to commit sexual abuse). But now we also know that teen boys physically abuse children they babysit only 1 in 100,000 times, while teen girls physically abuse 10 in 100,000. So your child might be slightly less at risk of sexual abuse with a teen girl, but at significantly higher risk of physical abuse.

This logical/statistical fallacy seems similar to the one where people refuse to swim in the ocean because of a fear of shark attacks (20 per year worldwide, or something like that), but have no concern about driving 80mph on the interstate while going to the beach (which has much higher risk of danger).

This discussion just is not useful without context.

By the way, I tried to google for stats on babysitter abuse, and found this:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/189102.pdf
http://www.darkness2light.org/docs/Protecting_Children_Statistics_11.14.05.pdf

If these links are correct, 90% of abusers are religious (same percentage as male). So by the logic of this thread, we all should insist that any babysitters be non-religious because religion is just as much a risk factor as maleness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would not allow a teenage boy to babysit my preschool girl, and when my DS becomes a teenager, I will not let him watch preschool girls either.

-Dad

This is a good point. When my DH was first starting out he was a permanent sub in a middle school class. One of the first pieces of advice from a male family friend who taught middle school also was "never be left in a room by yourself with one child, especially a girl." They were at pretty rough public schools (not in this area) where accusations from the kids came frequently when teachers disciplined the kids and they had no remorse.

So, to that regard my DH (now at a private school here) is careful to never be left alone with female students in particular so there is no room for false accusations. It's just how you have to be these days. (btw, I am a pp who said never)

[Anonymous]

Lol, my kid is three and I have never left her with a 'babysitter' other than her grannies. Twice. I was a pretty great babysitter as a teen, but I just don't trust the generic concept of 'teen boy'

[Anonymous]

It's not about what percent chance of risk there actually is especially when the harm is so great. The point is that you can pretty much eliminate the risk altogether by not allowing your child to be left alone with men you do not know extremely well.

I'm 100% sure that NONE of my mom friends would ever sexually harm my children. Their husbands? I don't think any are sexual predators and I'm not actually worried, but I'm not 100% sure. That's the point. The risk is low, the harm is great, and the solution is relatively easy.

[Anonymous]

Why would you not truth check who sexual predators are? They are men. That is the point. Look in the sex offender registry. Count the women in your zip code.

[Anonymous]

I have a 4 year old boy and I wouldn't let a teenage boy who was not family or close enough to be considered family watch him.