Kidnapped: Child Abduction in America

This book is not really a collection of "kidnapping stories" as one would presume or as one would get from a Ramsland type author. Through the analysis of the time and place of each kidnapping the author delves into the attitude and changing ideas of America toward kidnapping. Where once the assumption was that no one would kidnap anybody unless they expected a lucrative ransom, the assumption now is that no kidnapping takes place unless sexual abuse is the motive. How did we change? That's what this book is all about.

Great Book !

This is not easy reading, particularly for a left-behind parent who may have had to or continues to endure the terrorizing tragedy of child abduction or kidnapping (they are two very seperate but painful events, and are dealt with in the courts differently). In 'Kidnapped: Child Abduction in America' by Paula S. Fass, readers are brought into a historical perspective on how society deals with the abduction and wrongful removal of a child, and how this perception has moved the courts in different ways. Fass brings out a very important issue in this meaningful, yet painful book: what is the role of the media in abduction, and how has the role of the public voice directed the subjectivity of the various courts who are charged with overseeing such cases. Importantly, the author also points out that though the law is objective in theory, how the courts have handled abduction is subjective.What is missing, is an in-depth understanding of what a left-behind parent can do for themselves while seaching for a child. Emotionally, physically, spiritually, and financially most left-behind parents are left with scars no words could ever express. The turmoil brought onto a parent, yet alone a child, is unbearable. And for some, always with the safety of the child first and foremost, it may not be easy or suggested that a left-behind parent speaks directly to the press due to concern of their child's safety.Nevertheless, this is an invigorating book, and the stories presented, painful. When you see one of those fund raisers for an organization involved with missing children, do not think twice about helping. If you're a parent involved with a search, keep your faith. Sometimes its the only thing one can hold onto. Again, keep your faith.Well done, and thank you for bringing the issues of child abduction and child kidnapping out further into the public light.

"Kidnapped: Child Abduction in America," by Professor Paula S. Fass is the only study yet available on the subject. The book is useful for the accurate information which it contains despite that the fact that it also contains an abundance of inaccurate "facts," distortions, and willful omissions - all which support the author's ideological prejudices (which clearly lean heavily toward utopian/collectivist child-rearing by bureaucracies).The book's errors are legion; therefore only a small sample can be mentioned in a brief review. Fass claims the Philadelphia Charley Ross kidnapping of 1874 is America's first ransom kidnapping of a child (or the first "fully constructed" case, whatever is meant by that). In truth, the Pool case of 1819 qualifies as perhaps the first nationally known case (date of kidnapping: May 20, 1819, Baltimore, Md.). The Pool case does not, however, suit the author's ideological purposes. Nancy Gamble and Marie Thomas, the kidnappers of little 20-month-old Margaret Pool were females who physically abused their tiny victim.Throughout the book, Professor Fass makes broad claims that are not supported with a lick of evidence. One of these false claims is her generalization that women are seldom kidnappers for ransom, sadistic purposes, child labor purposes (prostitution, entertainment, servants). This is untrue.Deceptive rhetoric abounds in "Kidnapped: Child Abduction in America." In the book's introductory chapter, the "myth" of Gypsy kidnapping is compared to the Medieval "blood libel" against the Jews, allowing the reader to get the impression that the myth of Jewish kidnappers for child sacrifice and the myth of Gypsy child kidnapping are similar in type and origin. In truth, "blood libel" is based on prejudice, while the "myth" of Gypsy kidnapping is based on fact. Gypsies have long practiced child kidnapping and a great many documented cases exist -- throughout the 19th century well into the late middle 20th century.A number of the author's claims regarding the sub-category of child abduction, parental kidnapping, are outright fabrications: such as the assertions that parental kidnapping was not taken seriously in the early 20th century(utterly false) and further that during the 20s and 30s only cases involving rich and famous were reported by the press (utterly false. cases involving people of all classes were in the news constantly). The fact is that already in the early 1900s, parental kidnapping was the subject of long newspaper articles which treated the phenomenon as a serious social problem (see: "Love Proves Superior to Courts Decrees," nationally syndicated, including Marble Rock Press (Io.), Dec. 12, 1907; "Parental Love That Laughs at Court Decree," nationally syndicated, including Jun. 11, 1910, Evening Press (Sheboygen, Wi.)).One of the more egregious distortions to be found in "Kidnapped: Child Abduction in America," involves the 1874 Ross case. It deals with the fact that before a ransom demand had been made, police had begun searching for the missing Charlie in the Italian neighborhood. Fass tells her readers that the measure was taken based on "unsavory" stereotypes. The facts was that at the time Philadelphia was known to house a large population of "Padrones" who had left New York to escape prosecution there. Padrones were child slavers, who imported (kidnapped or purchased) children from Italy for the purpose of begging under the control of their masters. Many children were tortured and even mutilated (to make them more pitiful sights in order to attract alms). The scandal was so great that New York, in direct response to the Padrone racket, amended their kidnapping law to cover foreign-born victims.Fass, because of her predilection for applying present-day of moral preferences toward ethnic groups (ie: "politically correct" politics) ends up falsifying history and consequently cruelly diminishes the actual struggles of minority people. In the case of Italian-American child kidnapping of the later "Black Hand" period -- also ignored by Fass -- it was honest Italian immigrants who were preyed upon by Italian criminals. It was not unusual for poor parents to be victims of ransom demands of whatever sum was "appropriate" for the working class. The suffering of these innocent Italian victims was immense, involving a huge number of crimes over a period of decades.Professor Fass, by pretending that 1874 was the beginning of ransom kidnapping, the author manages to "historically cleanse" the rich and important history of child kidnapping of the 1830s-1860s, a period in which ransom child kidnapping gangs operated in Philadelphia, New York and elsewhere by erase inconvenient truths that violate her politically correct agenda. Likewise glossed over the issue of the kidnapping of the pre-Civil War children of free black parents -- despite the fact that the phenomenon was not absolutely separate from the other forms of child kidnapping that occurred concurrently.In the book's front material the author discloses that the book's writing was generously supported by a number of research grants, yet the final product proves that little research was actually done. The writing is quite good, but the scholarship is reprehensibly shoddy and its tendentiousness -- which fosters ignorance -- is dangerous.It is an alarming fact that of the several long academic reviews of the book that have been published none even so much at hints that the "facts" that Fass reports in her book might need more looking into (let alone that her endnotes routinely fail to support her claims with evidence). Apart from some disagreements concerning the interpretive approach (rather than questioning the factual data per se), her colleagues swallow the falsehoods -- hook, line and sinker -- without even a whimper of dissent.The author states that the problem of child kidnapping is an overrated one which should not be considered as important as many people think it is. Her book is designed to obfuscate the historical past in order to make her opinion seem to be based on historical fact, giving the overall impression that the book ought to be "the last word" on the history of the subject. As such, its dishonesty causes it to fail as even a "first word."The book is a travesty and must, at some point, be replaced with a thorough, properly researched and honest work of scholarship. Until then, policy makers, academics and other readers will be subjected to a grossly propagandistic book whose publication can be best be described as an act of "kidnapping memory."