The recent series of articles in the Valley News about sex crimes leads to two conclusions, apparently contradictory but in fact perfectly compatible: One is that a wealth of information exists about the nature and extent of sex offenses upon which to base broad generalizations; and second, that such generalizations do not necessarily shed light on any particular crime, offender or victim.

Everyone agrees that by its very nature, sexual abuse is among the most offensive forms of human conduct. But the four-part series, which ended Monday, conclusively demonstrated that much of the conventional wisdom regarding sex offenses is alarmingly at odds with the facts. For instance, the rates of such offenses in Vermont, New Hampshire, New England and the nation are generally falling, not rising; in the overwhelming majority of cases, sex offenders are not strangers to their victims, but rather are family members, friends, neighbors and acquaintances; many abusers of children are themselves children; treatment for sex offenders is often effective, and recidivism rates for many such offenders are below those for people convicted of other kinds of crimes; sentences for sex offenders are getting tougher, rather than more lenient, in many Vermont and New Hampshire courts; and while for some victims the long-term effects of sexual abuse are devastating, others manage to function effectively in society and in their private lives despite the emotional scars they bear.

Such facts are inconvenient for politicians determined to appear tough on crime, or resolved at least to protect themselves against the charge that they are soft on crime. That, however, is another editorial, for another day (tomorrow, in fact).

But this information also has implications for how ordinary individuals live their daily lives. To take but one basic example, it is hard for most people to comprehend that a family member or valued friend could molest a child and thereby violate the trust upon which close relationships depend. But it seems clear that parents who obsessively worry about strangers snatching their children from a playground may well be missing a real threat much closer to home.

It is also true that whatever the statistics say, generalizations are only that. Just because studies show that children are unlikely to be abducted and sexually abused by a stranger who has served a long prison sentence for sex offenses and received treatment, that doesn't mean that a particular child won't suffer that particular horrible fate. And it is perfectly understandable that the parents of that child might feel that no amount of time in prison for the offender is adequate compensation for their family's grief and hurt.

At the same time, accurately assessing risk is an important aspect of emotional health, both in an individual and in society. It is a grave mistake to allow public policy or personal conduct to be driven by unreasonable — or misplaced — fears stemming from an isolated incident that may have occurred in a distant place, the horror of which has been endlessly trumpeted by the media. Certainly, exercising caution prudently but with a sense of proportion cannot rule out the possibility of dark things happening to those whom we love. But the alternative is to allow fear to govern, and that is a grave risk indeed.