naturist wrote:
I am no physician, nor any sort of expert on human behavior, but my guess is that the kid the OP talks about is an Asperger syndrome kid. Not dangerous, you understand, but his inability to recognize faces or to pick up on subtle hints and somewhat obsessive, in this case with regard to helping, and inability to perceive boundaries suggests this to me.
Such a kid can be annoying, and somewhat alarming, without meaning to be or having nefarious intentions. Because an Asperger kid cannot process subtle social clues, there is no use in getting bent out of shape yourself with their behavior; they truly can't tell that they are annoying you. He's still a human being, of course, and deserving kind consideration, but admittedly somewhat difficult to deal with, especially if you don't recognize what is going on.
Naturist that may very well be true. I am not, nor do I believe anyone in this thread is blaming the child anymore than we would blame a wandering pet. The problem lies with those charged with the duty of supervision. If the child indeed has Asperger's syndrome that would be even more argument for a more watchful eye from a Guardian. That child would be even more likely to fall prey to anyone that would do him/her harm.
What I am preaching here is not just good social etiquette it's also about keeping a child safe. Teaching them about both goes a long way.