Originally Posted by
Antarius
This is often forgotten in the media age of "everyone is a predator". Strangers in public occupied spaces statistically aren't threats.
This is completely true and very important for everyone to know but also kind of irrelevant to how a flight attendant might actually behave. People think all sorts of things that aren't true and act on those beliefs. Related example: there is more violent crime than ever before. (Could also include statistics about gun ownership making everyone's life more dangerous, but I'll avoid that can of worms!) So the FAs may well be among the large fraction (I wouldn't be at all surprised if it's a majority) of Americans who think that random child abductors are common. And statistically, even child abuse by people known to the child is uncommon, but both kinds of child abuse do in fact happen (and, OP, I'm so sorry to hear that it happened to you), and of course adults should act to prevent any child abuse if they see something they think is suspicious.
But also, the FAs don't know that the OP doesn't know the child in back anyway. If the OP in fact were a child abuser, I can see an act like what the OP describes. I very much do not think that was
actually going on in this case, especially given the fact that the OP brought it up on a public forum, but I can see how a flight attendant might have seen it that way.
I also don't understand, if the OP and the child switched seats, how would the OP be able to be close or in contact with the child during the flight?
A scenario that could have seemed plausible to the FA at the time:
The passenger in fact did know the child on the plane and was pretending not to. The child gets upgraded, and as the child and the passenger pass each other in the aisle while swapping seats, the passenger says "enjoy your flight in first". The passenger sees the child after the flight and uses the gift to make the child feel special and beholden to the passenger. (Gifts to make victims feel special are a very common part of grooming, as I understand it.)
If the passenger didn't know the child, a similar story is still plausible:
The child gets upgraded, and as the child and the passenger pass each other in the aisle while swapping seats, the passenger says enjoy your flight in first. The passenger sees the child after the flight and uses the gift as a pretext to strike up a conversation with the child to make the child trust the passenger, beginning the grooming process.
In this individualistic day and age, it appears no good deed ever goes unpunished.
Just like misperceptions about relative risk of child abuse and crime rates, I'm not sure this day and age is any more individualistic than the past, but still very true. I think the OP absolutely was attempting a good deed and did nothing wrong, but I can also, with 20/20 hindsight, see how a well-meaning flight attendant could have been suspicious.