When I picked this book up, I thought it was another book by the same title. Shortly after beginning to read it, I realized my mistake but thought I would give it a try. I really wished I had read the book I originally intended to read.

Essentially, I think Furedi's theory is that many social forces today advocate risk aversion which in turn give the message that risks are immoral and the avoidance of risk is morally superior. This new morality has caused an increase in counseling, over-protective parents, media over-exposure in the coverage of disease, safe sex, abuse, neglect, and crime, a culture of victimhood, political correctness, and lowered expectations.

I'm not sure if it was the fact that I read this ten years after it was published or if Furedi just failed to intrigue me or a combination of the two, but I failed to make a strong connection with his premise. Even if true in 1997, his theory just does not seem to hold up in my opinion. While he has some good ideas, I do not see the relationship that these social forces have on risk aversion or the morality of low expectation. Low expectations - perhaps - but I fail to see it expressed as moral in the culture. And as for risk aversion, it makes sense to me to avoid many risks. If we, as a culture, fail to look at history than how are we to learn and not repeat mistakes. Furthermore, I see people taking risks all of the time, safe and dangerous risks in their careers, personal lives, and health.

Perhaps we do live in a culture of fear, but I do not believe that it is necessarily the sources Furedi cites or these sources are at work in much more complex ways than he suggest.