Do you ever get in discussions/arguments where you are unsure if you are being overly sensitive? Sometimes I really think my point of view is worthy but after the event think maybe I was being a bit unreasonable.

So... in our office yesterday someone mentioned how sad it was about Madeline dissapearing and that he hated to say it but she probably wasn't still alive. We were all agreeing that it was awful until french post-doc says that millions of children die in Africa everyday so why is it such big news. I was pretty angry and a bit shocked as I didn't really think it was comparable as Maddy was most likely abducted by a paedophile. I suppose lots of children do die all the time and that is awful too but I feel more sad about Maddy because of the situation. What does everyone think? I've been feeling a bit bad about losing my temper a bit.

It's funny that you tell this story, because I had an argument with someone in my office yesterday for exactly the same reason. In this case, I said it's hypocritical to make such a hype because of her, with all the celebrities offering millions of pounds and so on, while human traffikers kidnap African children every day and subsequently sell them to professional paedophile rings. I guess it's just a difficult topic, so I wouldn't worry about losing temper. It happens.

are you two sure you're not sharing an office?

on topic: I suppose feeling sorry for Maddy doesn't necessarily mean not caring for all the other ills of the world. Just as caring for other things shouldn't necessary mean not caring for Maddy's fate.
It is obvious that as soon as someone starts claiming that one cause is more important than other causes, people become emotional.
So in this case I don't think you overreacted, it is just normal.

We don't discuss anything in our office, it's completely opinionless. How boring...

That would be a bit weird if Otto was the french guy! But as he was talking about starving children rather than evil peopl I feel a bit safer that my cover hasn't been rumbled!

No, don't worry. I'm not French...

It's completely normal to feel more for Madeline than for thousands of other children: simply because a) we hear about her, unlike the many other children who disappear, and b) we can relate more to her family's situation. Likewise, technically it was hypocritical to get upset over the London tube bombs when those things happen to Iraqis on a daily basis, but it's normal to react more when a bad event happens on familiar territory.

I would ask your French guest precisely what steps she is taking to reduce human trafficking, since she feels so strongly about it.

I'm not so sure about this. We also hear about Iraquis and human traffickers quite often. But maybe our brain chooses to file these informations under 'not so important' or 'normal', together with 'destruction of the rainforest' and 'what did I have for lunch three days ago'.

Good point. Repeated exposure does normalize even the most grotesque things.

I don't think I explained properly, French post-doc was referring to all the famine and starvation in Africa, didn't mention human trafficking, which I have to admit I didn't really know much about.

The French guy has a point - and indeed there are so many missing children in the UK alone who don't get this kind of publicity
http://www.missingkids.com

However what's made this case so high-profile are the many the social and familial circumstances surrounding it. It's happened on holiday, in a high quality family-friendly resort: the parents are both doctors who are (rightly or wrongly) coming under intense scrutiny for leaving their children alone: the Portuguese police are also coming under criticism for not acting quickly enough when her disappearance was first reported.

In short, it's something that's happened in an allegedly safe environnment, far removed from the horrors and social imbalances of child sex trafficking, which is why it's given so much attention

No matter what environment, a crime is a crime. And some human lives are not better than others. Therefore I think the public reaction is partly hypocritical. I still hope that Madeleine will be found savely and with no harm.

You're right Otto, crimes are crimes no matter where they are committed.

What I was trying to say was that it's psychological reasoning about locality and familiarity that influences media reportage and, ultimately, public reaction. You only have to look at the Rwandan genocide to see how the perceptions of those in high places outside that country, that continent, resulted in the lack of intervention and strong empathy for the victims.

Rather then the "extra"ordinariness, it's the nearness and the *ordinariness*, of cases like Madeleine's, like Holly Wilson and Jessica Chapman's, that provoke such strong reactions above the plights of many others. While this is lamentable, is is also to an extent understandable.

I too hope that she is found - same with Alan Johnton, the reported who's been missing for weeks.

I know that sounds odd, but even if Madeleine is found dead it would be a burden lifted - it would deliver closure. I cannot inagine what it must be like for a parent, to not know either way.
Wasn't there a case about 12 (?) years ago, when a young boy went missing on holiday and has never been found?

I think people are misunderstanding me, I think *all* cases of abducted/missing children are awful and sad, wherever in the world and whatever nationality. I just don't really compare the deaths of these children to the deaths of children in places like Africa from diseases and famine because one is the act of a few individuals causing the deaths and the other is a culmination of a lot of bad things in the world.