In response to the rape conviction thread
 

Do you tell your child later in life that he/she was sexually assaulted before he was old enough to remember? Or is this something that you keep from your child to protect them? I don't think I would want to tell my child for fear of possible mental ramifications; I would feel guilty about keeping it from them, though.

What would be the point....definately not

I dont know what I would do -- but is anyone really certain that the child would not have some recollection of something happening-- they might not know what - but they knew somethig bad happened... Some people block out bad events... but what if others remember them...

if this child later had some sort of reproductive problems how could it be explained?

I never told my parents. I was 4.

If you think the child is having problems, you tell a professional - not the child.

The professional has no hidden pain or anger to deal with and will do what is best for the child.

Your telling the child may be about serving your own needs. It can be hard to see sometimes. Perhaps anger at a person and wanting to damage the childs relationship with them etc.
It can be very frustrating to see someone getting away with such a terrible thing, but in the end it is the childs welfare which has the highest priority.

It is more than likely you are emotional involved with this-
Let a professional deal with it from day one, if a problem shows up .

The worst case senario is that the child remembers nothing and has no problems due to it, you tell them - now what you tell them becomes their memory and they will have problems. In essence you will have given them the problems of being sexual abused by giving them a memory - not the original person. Then the child may end up later on thinking you lied to hurt the real offender- if no one else verifies it. You could end up looking like the bad guy. A real mess!!
Now that is guilt, anger and a whole mess of trouble.

after I buried the dude that did it, I'd never bring it up again.

I wouldn't tell them, unless there were problems that had arisen from the event such as emotional disturbance in the child that may have been caused by the experience or the burden of repressed memories, generally if something related to the event was causing the child to not function in a normal manor I would tell them. However, not before first taking them to a therapist and after at least a few months of therapy then tell them and after probably more therapy.
If they don’t know and aren’t affected then there is no reason to unduly put this event upon them, it won’t help them in any manor, other than knowing something bad happened, it might even cause them more pain.

If the kid is too young to remember, and there is no reason to tell them other than because it happened to them (like they weren't damaged in some way), then I wouldn't tell them. And I wouldn't feel guilty at all about keeping it from them.

Difficult question - it really comes down to the issue whether telling them would have any benefit, and/or whether not telling them would cause detriment.

I honestly can't say.

If my child had no recollection of what happened,
then there's no way I'd tell them. And I certainly
wouldn't feel any guilt about protecting my child's
mental well-being.

the child in this case was 12 weeks old....I seriously doubt they'd have any recollection of it happening

I honestly dont know what I'd do....

I voted yes, but I think it was in haste. If something had happened to me at a young age and I found out later in life that my parents knew but hadn't told me, I'd probably be pissed as all hell. Something in my mind says the kid has a right to know. But then again, if it only ends up hurting them emotionally then I'd rather keep it from them. I mean isn't the first rule of parenthood Protect Thy Child?

Maybe I shoulda clicked on undecided.

I voted undecided.

It is a tough one. One part of me says; "No, what possible good could come from it", but another says "this person has a right to know".

Also bear in mind that some of the older people that this person grows up with will probably know what happened, but will also have to keep it a secret. For me, this somehow makes not telling much worse.

I guess I would lean towards telling.

One thing that's still not clear is the medical status of the 12 month old. When my wife worked for a non-prof custodial care/counseling org, she encountered a 12 year old who had been molested as a baby, and had a permanently damaged cervix from the encounter. That kind of thing you have to explain later in life. Nobody did with this girl, which was why she ended up in care with a whale of a lot of problems.

If I had to explain to the child why mommy is in prison for flaying the bastard who did it alive with a rusty potato peeler. Otherwise, no, nay, never. I've gone crazy the few times my parents have told me "amusing" details from my early childhood. (Apparently, I was dropped on my head as an infant.) I can't even begin to imagine what it would be like to find out something like that.

If there was no lasting physical damage, no, definitely not.

If it were like this case, at 12 weeks old, no, I wouldn't. Why burden them?

At something like 2 years or older... yeah. They'd have memories whether or not I wanted them to. When it reared its ugly head, I'd have to.

no, I wouldnt tell them, it could only damage them as far as I can tell

its 12 weeks, not 12 months

In the case of the 12 week old, I'd probably wait until their mid twenties or thirties to tell them. Definitely not while they're still minors.

on this one soapie here in S.A. there was a situation like that where this one lady was molested by her father and became pregnant. she gave the baby up for adoption.and obviously, finding out that she was adopted, tried to find her birth mother and she did. later she found out that she was a product of this molestation (an inbreed) and that was the part of why she committed suicide in the end...she led a perfectly normal life until she decided to look for her birth mother who tried to hide it from her but it all unravelled and now she's 6 feet under.

need i say more...

It depends on the kid.

I think that when they were old enough to make their own medical decisions -- like 18 or so --they deserve to know what's happened to them, to their bodies. But there would be no rush to force that info on them at all. At some point they deserve to know, but not as vulnerable minors.

I'd definitely tell them. My parents drilled the idea into me that lying by omission is just as bad as any other kind of lie. The kid needs to know, and I know I'd be pissed enough to never speak to my parents again if they'd not told me about something like that. If they told me, I don't think it would even matter. But not telling me? Oh fuck no..

I'm not sure I can see how telling them would be harmful at all. It's in the past and now they're more informed. Where's the harm? The harm comes in NOT telling them and letting them find problems like the cervix problem above. And THEN finding out that you lied for their entire life.

I had to go with undecided.

Mainly because it's a catch 22.

If you tell the child you may bring out memories and issues that would not have ever come up.

But if you don't tell, and they find out or issues come up then they resent you for not telling them.

I have no idea. That's a tough one to call. Depends a lot on the child and what type of person they've grown into. Are they emotionally tough enough to handle it? I don't think this is a yes or no issue, but a grey area issue.

no I wouldn't tell them

Tough, though id have to say if they cant remember they dont know. Thats serious info to be telling anyone that has no clue. Guilt is a normal feeling to have when you love the person. To be safe i wouldn't tell.