# Article...Stop worrying about your children!



## KatWrangler (Mar 21, 2005)

http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/200...ids/index.html

Quote:

Amid the cacophony of terrifying Amber Alerts and safety tips for every holiday, Skenazy is a chipper alternative, arguing that raising children in the United States now isn't more dangerous than it was when today's generation of parents were young. And back then, it was reasonably safe, too. So why does shooing the kids outside and telling them to have fun and be home by dark seem irresponsible to so many middle-class parents today?
What do you think?


----------



## bandgeek (Sep 12, 2006)

I agree with a lot of things she says and I've been trying for a while to get in that mindset.

I decided we (as a society) were being entirely irrational when one day, I was exhausted and fell asleep and DD's nurse let DS outside to play. I guess he was bothering her and there were some kids outside about his age. She knew I needed sleep and sent him outside rather than wake me up.

When I woke up, I didn't hear DS in the house and I panicked and flew downstairs and asked where DS was. She told me he was outside playing with some kids. I just about lost it on her! I kept my cool though and went outside to check on him. He was just in the side yard connecting the 2 apartments, playing with a 5 year old girl. No harm done.

Then I went back inside and I realized she had opened the window so she could see and hear him. He wasn't in danger. It just never occured to me that a 4 1/2 year old could be safe playing outside alone. DD's nurse is my mom's age. All of us kids played outside by the time we could walk. A lot of times there were older kids to watch us, but they were all of 7 or 8 years old. By the time I was 5 I was playing across the apartment complex and going up and down the street. By the time I was 6, I was walking to school, about 6 blocks away. No doubt her daughter did too.

So I never said anything to her. Instead I thought long and hard about it. I let him play outside alone the next day and the next day.... I can always hear or see him and I made friends with the couple next door. They are grandparents and their granddaughter was the one DS was playing with. They are nice and the grandpa and I compare oxygen supply companies and products like geeks.







They adore DD and had a niece with CP who died a long time ago, so they know what I'm going through.

I think part of the problem is we're not as friendly and neighborly as we used to be. Everywhere I've lived, we haven't made friends with our neighbors. Nobody seems to want to talk and I'm quite shy really. I don't know if it's like this for other people. So I've been trying to talk to everyone and get to know them. And in turn, they learn who my kids are and if there's ever a problem, I know they would come to me, like if DS fell and scraped his knee and was crying on the sidewalk. And I would do the same for them. It used to be that everyone kind of kept an eye on everyone else's kids. If you looked out your window and saw little Tommy from up the street talking to some man you'd never seen, you'd walk outside and find out what was going on. You wouldn't just ignore it. It's easier to ignore when you don't know the kid or his parents.

I talked with DS about his boundries....don't go in the street, don't play in the puddle (it gets deep when it rains), don't play around the dumpster, ect. I just had the "stranger talk" with him a few days ago. I don't want to scare him with stranger danger. I told him not to go with strangers, not to let them in the house, not to take things from them, ect. I did NOT tell him not to talk to them though. I don't want my kid thinking everyone is a bad guy and they can hurt you just from talking to you. In fact, I told him if he's ever lost, the best person to find to help him is another mommy. I told him if anyone ever tried to take him, he's supposed to yell, "This person is not my mommy/daddy!".

When he's older and I'm sure all of that has sunk in, I'll let him out of my sight.


----------



## lolar2 (Nov 8, 2005)

I agree with her on all counts except the police background checks in Great Britain. I had a couple of jobs working with teenagers in England where I had to provide that background check, and it was in no way onerous-- took me a two-minute phone call and that was it. We require criminal background checks in the US too. I guess her concern is that it's required for volunteers too, but really it's EASY and quick. It does not limit the children's freedom the way the other things she talked about does.


----------



## betsyj (Jan 8, 2009)

Very enjoyable article. When I was a kid I was shoved out the door in the morning and told to come home when I was hungry.

I hope to do this with my son as well. We live in a neighborhood with lots of kids and they are always outside which is nice.

Now, I wonder about something. My neighborhood is middle to lower middle class and there are always kids around. In the richer neighborhoods I almost never see kids outside just playing. Do you think this huge safety push is more concentrated in upper middle class homes and neighborhoods when in reality those kids are probably safer?


----------



## GuildJenn (Jan 10, 2007)

I have such mixed feelings.

Overall I agree that kids need some freedom in order to learn and grow, and that being outside and in the community is a really important part of that experience.

On the other hand, I think her nostalgia for the 70s is a bit - odd. As someone who walked or took the streetcar and bus to school alone starting towards the end of kindergarten, I remember quite a few bad things that happened that I would prefer not happen to my kid. In a snowstorm I waited for the streetcar rather than walking and my boots were wet and I almost lost some toes. My friend and I discovered a dead baby in a bag in a ravine. I was flashed twice. I was robbed a few times. I was pushed down and broke a finger. In fact there was a lot of older kid bullying.

It was definitely not all la la la roses and joy.

Also, I don't think that it's fear of stranger danger that is the biggest factor in the loss of middle-class kids at the playground & around the neighbourhood.

I think it's actually more about the prevalence of two-income families who actually do find care for their kids (rather than a lot of SAHMs, or using extended family) and of course if you're paying for supervision you expect - supervision. Added to that is a fair amount of pressure to go for organized sports and activities and there's just less time.

And there's the draw of the tv, video games, etc. So the kids themselves may be choosing to stay in.

I think as with most things there is a middle ground, and a lot of parents ARE finding that middle ground. Meanwhile she's making money berating helicopter parents. I think her hype about how all kids are confined is pretty much just that - hype.


----------



## Marsupialmom (Sep 28, 2003)

Even the police checked worked -- I think I would be on board with it. But in reality they don't. You can have no record of being a pediphile, physical abuser, or verbal abuser. Also, with our current sex offender list they are becoming useless because they have to many people on it for things that doesn't mean they will harm children.


----------



## hottmama (Dec 27, 2004)

My 3yo is playing outside right now. I like more contact than "be back before dark"-- I check on them every 15-30 minutes. Our rules are: don't go in the parking lot or street, and ask permission if you're going to go further than my sight range from the porch.
At 6, I rode my bike over a mile to school with my 9yo boy neighbor. At 7, I walked home with my 5yo sister, let us into the house, and played inside or in the yard until my mom got home from work at 5. Nothing bad ever happened to us, if you don't count bickering (which my boys do plenty of with me around).
I want my kids to be equally capable, even if necessity doesn't require them to stay home alone for 2 hours a day. Within the next year, I'd like to be able to leave my oldest at home alone for a half hour. They love the freedom being able to play outside with their friends. The kids I know (family) who aren't allowed to play outside, just sit and watch TV or play video games for many hours a day. No wonder we have childhood obesity!


----------



## mjg013 (Jul 29, 2008)

While I don't feel that modern times are more dangerous than when I was a kid or my parents were kids that doesn't mean I think they are any safer either. We're talking about an era of Ted Bundy and Son of Sam and John Wayne Gacy and Albert Fish. Modern technology has made it possible to solve crimes more efficiently but also made it possible to commit crimes more efficiently. I live in a culdesac and ALL my neighbors except the one who is gone 90% of the time driving a truck have young children. All our kids go outside every day when the weather is good and play. They play in my backyard or another neighbor's back yard or ride their bikes in the culdesac or climb trees. They range in age from 4-13. They come in when the streetlights come on or we call them in for supper. Occasionally one of us will look out on them to make sure we can hear or see them and they are ok. My 2.5 year old twins play in my fenced backyard alone or with the older kids out there. I leave the window open to hear them and I can see them from wherever I am in the house. I don't reminisce about the good old days because the good old days are always the days of childhood when life seemed simpler because for children it is simpler. You can hardly base the frequency and likelihood of danger on the perspective of child vs adult. To an adult life will always seem more dangerous.


----------



## Dar (Apr 12, 2002)

Works for me.

I remember sending my daughter off to the coffee shop a block away from us when she was 7, to buy me a mocha (and I think I funded something for her, too







). It was just a block down a quiet street, but some people freaked. By 10 or so she was wandering around downtown Davis with a friend for a few hours, and by 12 she was flying solo cross country, even changing planes. Once she had a cell phone I really had no worries...

dar


----------



## Dr.Worm (Nov 20, 2001)

But what do you do when you want your kid to have freedom but you live in a town that has a registered sex offender and 2 years in a row 2 different men trying to lure kids into their vehicles. Some of the kids DD's age(9) do wander all around the neighborhood and usually I think it is insane..but then lately I started to think maybe I am a worry wart and then I hear about the guy trying to kidnap kids.


----------



## bobandjess99 (Aug 1, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dr.Worm* 
But what do you do when you want your kid to have freedom but you live in a town that has a registered sex offender and 2 years in a row 2 different men trying to lure kids into their vehicles. Some of the kids DD's age(9) do wander all around the neighborhood and usually I think it is insane..but then lately I started to think maybe I am a worry wart and then I hear about the guy trying to kidnap kids.

We ALL live in this town. honestly, all towns have registered sex offenders...and crimes occur everywhere. There is reasonable cuation, and over-caution..and think the author is trying to get us to realize our ideas of reasonable caution have totally croseed the line into extreme overprotectiveness....


----------



## soxthecatrules (Oct 20, 2008)

I had to laugh about the comment on kneepads for crawlers. We almost bought these for DS! Not b/c of the crawling, but due to the fact that he "walked" on his knees until he was 20 mos old. Hardwood, asphalt, tile, you name it! It was one of the craziest things to witness.

On a more serious note....I've decided that as parents we have to pick our battles. I've learned soooo much via MDC and similar forums and at times have become very overwhelmed. I'm now in the mode of continuing to learn but make a very consious effort as to what I get worked up over. It will do my children no good if I'm a nervous wreck.


----------



## Kappa (Oct 15, 2007)

My neighborhood is more middle middle class. My baby is still young, but I asked my husband one day, when we saw a family riding bikes together, "What if DS wants to go outside and ride his bike, and I don't want to go?" He didn't know the answer. I was basically wondering if/when it was ok to just let him go have fun/get into trouble, what is considered poor supervision, and what is considered neglect. In my neighborhood, you never see kids just riding bikes. We have a pretty nice neighborhood, with open streets that aren't busy at all, sidewalks, and a nice green park area with a trail. That is pretty much all I used to do growing up. If I went to a friend's house, it was always to ask if so-and-so could ride bikes. I would get turned off if every time I wanted to ride bikes I had to twist my Mom's arm, change my clothes and find all of my protective gear, have Mom trail me, then go home when she got ready to go.


----------



## choli (Jun 20, 2002)

I agree with her 100%.

"So every adult there who has any interest in children is assumed to have an interest that's very prurient -- perverse until proven otherwise."

I've seen this attitude to men frequently on MDC.

"My big idea is: "Take Our Children to the Park and Leave Them There Day." I think that would be a great thing for our country.

Maybe the 7-year-old will walk the 5-year-old home, and nobody would say: "Oh my God, where are the parents? Let's arrest them."

I've seen this a lot on MDC as well. OMG, unsupervised children at the park. Should I call CPS?

Wasn't there a thread once where someone thought she should call CPS over seeing a 6 yr old go to the store by herself?


----------



## JamesMama (Jun 1, 2005)

There is a fine line I guess...

I saw 2 1.5 y/os at the park playing by themselves...the parents were out of eye sight, out of ear shot clear across the park. Not USUALLY a big deal...but this park is...well not 1.5 year old friendly IMO. There are 5ft high ledges where you either repel off or use the firefighter pole...slides you could easily fall off...6 or 7 feet. I let James play alone, but I don't let DD play alone...she doesn't have the concept of "Fall from a 5 ft ledge=broken leg" yet...









We live in a safe neighborhood. Maybe around 9 or 10 I'd let James walk to the gas station or the coffee shop alone...if we're still living here (we're about 4 or 5 blocks away)..9 or 10 because we do live on a fairly busy road, and 2 of the intersections he'd have to wait for a green light, the other 3 it's our right of way


----------



## Mommybree (Jul 27, 2007)

I know this won't be coherent, but I just feel like kids should be free to be kids and not be expected to be in charge of their own well-being at the same time. I think childhood is a time for fun and exploration, with adults providing the environment to allow that to happen safely. I don't think a 9 year old should be applauded for riding the subway by himself; I think it's sad that his mother doesn't view him as a child and expects him to do things an adult does.

I think that I disagree with Skenazy's basic view of childhood. I think that children should be encouraged to be children and not be weighed down with too many responsibilities. She sees children as miniature adults. Using Ben Franklin being apprenticed off at age 12 is not a convincing argument for more childhood freedom to me. It doesn't make me think that centuries ago kids were given more freedoms; it makes me think that centuries ago, people like poor Ben weren't allowed to enjoy their childhoods! I think it's wonderful that a modern 12 year old isn't expected to do the level of work 12 year olds did in the past. I don't think Skenazy convincingly makes the argument that children are self-sufficient because they were previously allowed to do things at a certain age. I think children are children and should be cared for accordingly.

I also disagreed with her assumption that people are living in fear of rare situations, like stranger abduction. I don't let my almost 4 year old play outside by herself because I have some irrational, not-based-on-statistical-probability fear of stranger abductions. I don't let her play outside by herself because she is a young child whose limitations I know. My daughter is not capable of making safety decisions for herself (like what to do if she were injured, what to do if approached by animal, how to stay in the yard, not to run after a ball into the street, etc.). There are other dangers that are much more likely than stranger abduction, and it is those dangers that I am worried about for my daughter.

Also, I realize just how dangerous it is to ride in a car. That's why when we do, my children are restrained in the safest manner possible for their size (currently they are both rear-facing). It is precisely because riding in a car is so dangerous that car seat safety is so important.


----------



## choli (Jun 20, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mommybree* 
I don't think a 9 year old should be applauded for riding the subway by himself; I think it's sad that his mother doesn't view him as a child and expects him to do things an adult does.

I don't think he should be applauded either. I think it should be so much the norm that no one bats an eyelid.

My DDs were both well able to navigate public transportation by 10 years old. It doesn't take adult skills.


----------



## Mommybree (Jul 27, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *choli* 
I agree with her 100%.

"So every adult there who has any interest in children is assumed to have an interest that's very prurient -- perverse until proven otherwise."

I've seen this attitude to men frequently on MDC.

"My big idea is: "Take Our Children to the Park and Leave Them There Day." I think that would be a great thing for our country.

Maybe the 7-year-old will walk the 5-year-old home, and nobody would say: "Oh my God, where are the parents? Let's arrest them."

I've seen this a lot on MDC as well. OMG, unsupervised children at the park. Should I call CPS?

Wasn't there a thread once where someone thought she should call CPS over seeing a 6 yr old go to the store by herself?

See, I completely disagree with her statement "The 7-year-old would be taking care of the 5-year-old, and oftentimes the 5-year-old would be taking care of the 3-year-old." I don't think a 7 year old should be responsible for a 5 year old and I don't think a 5 year old should be responsible for a 3 year old. I think at those ages a child's obligation should be having fun. I guess my sentiment toward childhood is the complete opposite!


----------



## choli (Jun 20, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mommybree* 
See, I completely disagree with her statement "The 7-year-old would be taking care of the 5-year-old, and oftentimes the 5-year-old would be taking care of the 3-year-old." I don't think a 7 year old should be responsible for a 5 year old and I don't think a 5 year old should be responsible for a 3 year old. I think at those ages a child's obligation should be having fun. I guess my sentiment toward childhood is the complete opposite!

I had two younger sisters for whom I was often responsible. It didn't take away from the fun at all - we were used to playing together as a unit. I didn't have to earn the rent and food money, just bring them to my mom when they fell and cut their knees. We all fell and cut our knees a lot, but you know, that didn't take away from the fun, either.


----------



## Mommybree (Jul 27, 2007)

I have three younger siblings that I spent the better part of my childhood watching. My sister is close in age to me and my brothers are 7 and 9 years younger than me. I liked playing with my sister, but we had to watch my brothers. I wasn't playing with them; I was preventing them from jumping off the top stair, etc. I guess we know where my biases come from regarding this issue!


----------



## choli (Jun 20, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mommybree* 
I have three younger siblings that I spent the better part of my childhood watching. My sister is close in age to me and my brothers are 7 and 9 years younger than me. I liked playing with my sister, but we had to watch my brothers. I wasn't playing with them; I was preventing them from jumping off the top stair, etc. I guess we know where my biases come from regarding this issue!

You have a point there! There was two years between each of my siblings. I'd probably have felt different as a 10 year old watching a 1 yr old!

I think though, for kids close in age, the safety of the sibling pack is pretty good for any kids over about 3 or 4. Any younger and there are toiletting issues, etc.


----------



## BathrobeGoddess (Nov 19, 2001)

This is one of the issues I am thinking I might explore in my PhD thesis:

What effect has sensationalized media had on parental decision regarding freedom, responsibility and accountability in children when looked at under a developmental microscope.

I believe that it is very possible we are in danger of having a young generation of future leaders and decision makers who are stunted in both abilities because they were not allowed to take "appropriate risks" as children. I'm not making a generalized statement about the population on this board or anyone who has replied by as a nation on the whole.

I also find it so interesting that many natural families do things that more mainstream parents would consider far more risky than letting a 10 year old child play outside alone (non-vaxing, not using Western Meds, birthing at home, etc.) but in our realm those are appropriate risks.


----------



## mistymama (Oct 12, 2004)

I think there is a happy medium - but I do agree with much of what she says, just not all.

I try to strike a balance - it's very important to me because I was raised by a super over protective Mom. I was sure safe







but it wasn't much fun. And as I got older, it actually did more harm than good.

So with ds, I try to find balance. I'm not worried about stranger abduction - my concerns are more about if he gets hurt and I can't hear him (he has sensory issues and is fairly clumsy). I allow him to play outside alone, go to the park that is right behind our apartment (but I can't see from my windows) alone & walk down to one friend's apartment that is several buildings away. He is allowed in that one friend's house (I will call her Mom and set up times to play) but knows he is never to go into anyone else's home without permission. Unless he is at his one friend's house, he needs to stay within earshot where he can hear me call him in. That's a pretty wide area, and gives him lots of room to play with different kids.

I feel comfortable with our set up. As he gets older, I hope to give him more freedom as well. And yes, he's gotten hurt several times. Skinned knees, stubbed toes - each time his friends have helped him get back home, and since I check around and can hear the kids playing, I can usually tell something is up and go down to help him.

I guess it's all about balance for us. I can't see myself throwing him on public transportation anytime soon.







But I do allow him freedom that I think he can handle - I would hope people don't think I'm neglectful - I'm seriously trying to strike a balance between keeping him safe, and giving him freedom to take risks and solve problems on his own.


----------



## EnviroBecca (Jun 5, 2002)

Dr. Worm wrote:

Quote:

But what do you do when you want your kid to have freedom but you live in a town that has a registered sex offender and 2 years in a row 2 different men trying to lure kids into their vehicles.








You teach your kid:
1. Never get into a car with someone you don't know.
2. If a man or older boy flashes you or make suggestive comments, laugh at him like he's the most ridiculous thing you've ever seen. That really takes the wind out of their sails.








3. If someone is making you seriously uncomfortable, come home and/or tell an adult right away.
4. If something terrible does happen to you, it is not your fault.
All these are lessons she needs to learn someday. Why not start now?

Mommybree, I feel that gradually taking charge of my own well-being was one of the most wonderful things about childhood. It was so exciting to ride my bike all the way around the whole block by myself and see that I could take care of myself and find my way home. The first time I fell and skinned my knee when no adult was watching, the thrill of going into the house and washing and bandaging the scrape all by myself and getting myself a cheer-up cookie







just about made up for the pain. The key is for these things to be gradual. If you don't let your children take care of themselves at all until they're 16, then expect them to learn to do everything for themselves in the next 2 years, it'll be a lot harder for them to learn and will seem less pleasant because they'll be "spoiled" by having had everything done for them, IMO.


----------



## MayBaby2007 (Feb 22, 2007)

I try to see things differently like so many of you. For brief moments, I think about giving my daughter all the freedom that so many say kids need. I was thinking that when I started reading this thread....

....and then I turned on Oprah. She's interviewing the Mccanns (sp?)--the couple who's daughter was abducted in Portugal in May 2007. The kids were apparetnly out of their sight. They checked on the kids every 30 minutes. Mom went to check when 30 minutes were up and one kid was gone.

As much as I would like to think that my kid would be perfectly safe at our small town park (4-5 blocks away) alone, she won't have that opportunity for a long time. Very long. Not sure when--but not in the next 10 years, I'm sure.

Life is too precious to take chances, as Mother Mccann just said. My dd's life is too precious to risk it on giving her the freedom that some say she needs.


----------



## ElleTwo (Mar 2, 2009)

There's the problem with basing your life decisions on gut reactions to media. From what I recall, there are approximately 800,000 children reported missing every year, and of those the number abducted by strangers is around 100. Oprah could do a show on all the millions of children who are just fine and dandy every day, but that would not be nearly as exciting for her audience as this kind of tragedy.

I consider making my own child raising decisions based on the possibilty of a stranger kidnapping them in the same vein as planning my retirement financial strategy on winning the Lotto...it just isn't very logical.


----------



## annethcz (Apr 1, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mommybree* 
I know this won't be coherent, but I just feel like kids should be free to be kids and not be expected to be in charge of their own well-being at the same time. I think childhood is a time for fun and exploration, with adults providing the environment to allow that to happen safely. I don't think a 9 year old should be applauded for riding the subway by himself; I think it's sad that his mother doesn't view him as a child and expects him to do things an adult does.

Do you have a 9yo? 9yos can be pretty capable. I know that when you have younger children it can be difficult to think about what it will be like when they are older. For a 9yo, riding the subway alone probably would be equivalent to 'fun and exploration.'

I think we do children a real disservice to treat them as if they are incapable managing their own well being. If we choose to breastfeed on demand and trust our kids to know when they're hungry as infants, doesn't that correllate to trusting them not to fall of the ledge of a slide when climbing on a playground as a toddler and trusting them to play alone safely as a young child? I see this as a natural progression. And I agree with a PPer that it makes no sense to protect our children from all possible harm when they are children, but still expect them to know how to care for themselves effectively as teenagers or young adults, when they have had no opportunities to practice.

Quote:

I think that I disagree with Skenazy's basic view of childhood. I think that children should be encouraged to be children and not be weighed down with too many responsibilities. She sees children as miniature adults. Using Ben Franklin being apprenticed off at age 12 is not a convincing argument for more childhood freedom to me. It doesn't make me think that centuries ago kids were given more freedoms; it makes me think that centuries ago, people like poor Ben weren't allowed to enjoy their childhoods! I think it's wonderful that a modern 12 year old isn't expected to do the level of work 12 year olds did in the past. I don't think Skenazy convincingly makes the argument that children are self-sufficient because they were previously allowed to do things at a certain age. I think children are children and should be cared for accordingly.
Children are not miniature adults, but they are far more capable than our culture gives them credit for. FTR, I've read several biographies of Ben Franklin, and he did enjoy his childhood. But he didn't believe himself to be a child at the age of 12, either.

When I was 12, I craved greater independence, I think that is the case with many 12yos in our culture.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mommybree* 
See, I completely disagree with her statement "The 7-year-old would be taking care of the 5-year-old, and oftentimes the 5-year-old would be taking care of the 3-year-old." I don't think a 7 year old should be responsible for a 5 year old and I don't think a 5 year old should be responsible for a 3 year old. I think at those ages a child's obligation should be having fun. I guess my sentiment toward childhood is the complete opposite!

But for my 7yo, taking care of her 5yo sister IS fun. And I can't tell you how much my 5yo enjoys running around with her 3yo cousins and friends. We have that EXACT scenario happening at my house, and it works out great. Do I let the 5yo and 3yo run up and play on the highway? No way! But do I have any qualms about the two of them playing out of sight in the basement or in the woods in the backyard? Not at all.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *choli* 
I think though, for kids close in age, the safety of the sibling pack is pretty good for any kids over about 3 or 4. Any younger and there are toiletting issues, etc.

I agree. My kids take really good care of themselves and their siblings when they're out and about together.


----------



## shayinme (Jan 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mommybree* 
*I don't think a 9 year old should be applauded for riding the subway by himself; I think it's sad that his mother doesn't view him as a child and expects him to do things an adult does.*


I grew up in Chicago which is the 3rd largest city in America and at 9 I knew how to ride the bus, though not the trains. However by 12-13 I was riding the trains regularly and it was a good thing since at 14, I went across the city to attend one of the best high schools.

I don't know but growing up in an urban area, I think its important for kids to know how to get around. My folks rarely had a car, heck my mom never drove so taking public transit was a reality.

The problem with sheltering them is that IMO opinion it can hinder them. My oldest is 17 and has been flying alone since he was 5...that was the reality of life with joint custody. Yes, it was scary at first but totally safe. The thing my son's best friend is also 17 and while the kid now drives a car, his Mama still freaks out about her son taking public transit. That is something I totally don't get yet part of it is she never allowed her son to take it so its easier to fear it.

Regarding the OP and the article, I like thos woman, I remember when she got all that flack and honestly I think it was overblown. The thing is we have to gradually give kids freedom otherwise you end up like my son's best friend on the cusp of adulthood and not having been allowed to do things because of fear.

Its not about turning them into mini adults but recognizing that we need to allow them to grow up.

Now I was not allowed to walk home from school at 5, but by 8.5 I was able to, now it seems very few folks allow their kids to walk home.

Shay


----------



## UUMom (Nov 14, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dar* 
Works for me.

I remember sending my daughter off to the coffee shop a block away from us when she was 7, to buy me a mocha (and I think I funded something for her, too







). It was just a block down a quiet street, but some people freaked. By 10 or so she was wandering around downtown Davis with a friend for a few hours, and by 12 she was flying solo cross country, even changing planes. Once she had a cell phone I really had no worries...

dar


I agree!

My kids bike, and some folks in town have been "OMG!" I told my 15 yr old to bike home (less than a mile home from a friend's home--which he biked to) and the mom's friend thought that was too much and brought him home in her car! lol I laughed when I saw them pull up! The next day I asked him to walk back there and ride his bike home, and he did. lol Imagine! less than a mile being too much for a middle teen.


----------



## Ruthie's momma (May 2, 2008)

I don't agree with much of what that author has to say. How can a parent be criticized for being mindful of their little one's safety. Furthermore, how can others think that it is any of their business? Now, we are going to judge/monitor not only neglectful parents but careful parents as well?

My parents were always very cautious with my siblings and me. We were not given the chance to roam our neighborhoods freely. We were to call home and check-in regularly. But, I also was able to fly across the country on my own at 10 yoa.

I understand that children need to be allowed to be children. I agree that most media outlets will sensationalize violent criminal activity. But, my own motherly instinct tells/will tell me to be cautious.


----------



## tanyam926 (May 25, 2005)

I just don't think that children should be responsible for their own safety. I believe this is disussed in Protecting the Gift by Gavin Debecker (sp?).

I have seen studies that talk about teens' brains and how they are not fully mature enough to fully appreciate the consequences of their actions. I have seen reports about children who when left alone did not listen to their parents' warnings about not touching guns.

W/my own children (6 1/2 and 3 1/2) I def. know they aren't capable of taking care of themselves in case of an emergency. They routinely do things that show lack of adult judgement.

I do feel like there are some parents that hover and that losing that closer knit community means we lose some freedom and sense of safety for the kids.

The reality is that while my kids would probably be safe down the street w/out my supervision, there are a myriad of things that could happen that I am not confidant that they could and should be able to handle on their own.

Interesting discussion though.


----------



## cschick (Aug 28, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *choli* 
I've seen this a lot on MDC as well. OMG, unsupervised children at the park. Should I call CPS?

Wasn't there a thread once where someone thought she should call CPS over seeing a 6 yr old go to the store by herself?

Right.

More than fear about what would happen to the kids, I fear the nosy busybodies who would call CPS over my parenting protectiveness not living up to their standards.

Although, whether luckily or unluckily, my current neighborhood would give a lot of the "should I call CPS" people around these forums absolute fits. So I trust that my neighborhood as it currently is wouldn't generally have people calling CPS on us. But it only takes one person moving in and disagreeing with the way most people around do their parenting . . .


----------



## LynnS6 (Mar 30, 2005)

I loved the article. Our kids have relatively free range in the neighborhood. So far, they haven't expressed interest in going to the park themselves, but ds is 8, and I would let him do that.

Today as I was leaving for work (dd was home with dh), dd was going out into the front yard to have a 'picnic'. She'd made a peanut butter and jelly sandwich, mangled it into small pieces, packed an apple, wheat thins, carrots and a bottle of water. She had a towel, a backpack, her coat and her imaginary friends. She was having a blast preparing for this event. And thought at the time about reading about kids the same age (4, going on 5) who weren't allowed to play in their front yard unsupervised.

My kids have to tell me where they are (someone's yard, someone's house). But in reality, there's a group of kids who play together (somewhere between 4-10 depending on the day), and the little kids learn a lot from the older ones. The older kids are pretty good about watching out for the younger ones, and not too many stupid things happen.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dr.Worm* 
But what do you do when you want your kid to have freedom but you live in a town that has a registered sex offender and 2 years in a row 2 different men trying to lure kids into their vehicles. Some of the kids DD's age(9) do wander all around the neighborhood and usually I think it is insane..but then lately I started to think maybe I am a worry wart and then I hear about the guy trying to kidnap kids.

This happens no more often now than it did when I was a kid 35 years ago. I heard about it then, but no one stopped me from playing outside. And for the men who tried to lure kids - they didn't succeed, right? So, you equip your child with tools to trust their gut and the confidence that they will do so. Any 5 year old is capable of understanding 'Why would a grown up ask a KID for help? Grown ups are supposed to be more knowledgeable and more capable. So if a grown up asks you for help or to come with them, come get your mom or dad, because we're in a better position to help another grown up."

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kappa* 
My neighborhood is more middle middle class. My baby is still young, but I asked my husband one day, when we saw a family riding bikes together, "What if DS wants to go outside and ride his bike, and I don't want to go?"

Work on boundaries with him as to where he can go, and when you're confident that he can respect those boundaries, let him go by himself. My experience is that kids don't wander that far on their own. Really.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mommybree* 
I don't think a 9 year old should be applauded for riding the subway by himself; I think it's sad that his mother doesn't view him as a child and expects him to do things an adult does.

The difference between a 9 year old and even a 7 year old is pretty big. The difference between 9 and 4 is huge. 9 year olds WANT responsibility. They don't want to be treated like they are not capable. It doesn't mean that they need to work 12 hour days, but it does mean that they should see themselves as capable humans. My 8 year old is learning to do the laundry. He LIKES doing the laundry during chore time. My kids' favorite chores are: recycling, mopping, laundry and cleaning the bathrooms. Everyone in the family contributes.

I walked to the library by myself all the time when I was a kid. I was taking the bus by myself when I was 10. I cooked dinner for the family when I was 10. I rode my bike a good 5 miles to my flute lessons. I was fine.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mommybree* 
I don't let my almost 4 year old play outside by herself because I have some irrational, not-based-on-statistical-probability fear of stranger abductions. I don't let her play outside by herself because she is a young child whose limitations I know. My daughter is not capable of making safety decisions for herself (like what to do if she were injured, what to do if approached by animal, how to stay in the yard, not to run after a ball into the street, etc.). There are other dangers that are much more likely than stranger abduction, and it is those dangers that I am worried about for my daughter.

Our daughter played outside without supervision a lot last summer. She turned 4 in May and spent a good chunk of the summer outside, without me. Sometimes I'd be down there, but most of the time, no. The kids who play outside are very good about watching for cars. Any time they see a car, you hear the word "Car!" being shouted out from all directions.

I probably wouldn't have let her be out there so much if there hadn't been other kids, but then she wouldn't have wanted to be out there when there weren't other kids!

She WAS capable of learning basic safety. If she fell and hurt herself, what was her initial instinct? Come find mom and dad!


----------



## cschick (Aug 28, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *EnviroBecca* 
Mommybree, I feel that gradually taking charge of my own well-being was one of the most wonderful things about childhood. It was so exciting to ride my bike all the way around the whole block by myself and see that I could take care of myself and find my way home. The first time I fell and skinned my knee when no adult was watching, the thrill of going into the house and washing and bandaging the scrape all by myself and getting myself a cheer-up cookie







just about made up for the pain. The key is for these things to be gradual. If you don't let your children take care of themselves at all until they're 16, then expect them to learn to do everything for themselves in the next 2 years, it'll be a lot harder for them to learn and will seem less pleasant because they'll be "spoiled" by having had everything done for them, IMO.

The summer after 7th grade (and then again after 8th) I participated in ISYM (http://www.music.uiuc.edu/isym/index.html). Back then, participants were housed in the residence hall FAR, and that name was an ironic joke because it was the FURTHEREST residence hall on the Champaign/Urbana campus from just about everything else. (I also recall the camp was two weeks long, back then, compared to the one week sessions they now appear to have.)

All us kids had to do was show up at our weekday ensembles/practices and our two required evening performances, and be back in our rooms by lights out. Any time not occupied by those requirements was ours to do as we pleased. I spent that time all over the Champaign/Urbana area.

So, at age 12, I basically lived "on my own" for two weeks with minimal supervision, all over a smallish urban area. When my clarinet lost a pad during a practice, one of my instructors gave me me the name of a shop, directions on how to get there on the bus system, and sent me on my way. So, I had to make my way there, negotiate having my instrument repaired ASAP, and get myself back.

It was one of the best experiences of my life.

But my parents had also well-prepared me for participating in something like that--by 12, I had a far amount of travelling freedom around the areas in which we lived.

So, sometime before age 9: I was allowed to ride my bike all over our Chicago neighborhood, bounded by a box 1-1.5 miles in all directions. When it was warm, I/we also walked or biked the 1 mile to/from school, and had been doing that for several years. (Sometimes it was just me, sometimes it was me and sibs, sometimes me and friends.)

Age 9: I learned how to ride CTA buses, and go to the pool with friends.

Age 10: moved to suburbs, and I remember being all over our suburb on my bike within days of moving in.

Age 11: Could ride my bike the 2+ miles to Aqua and the library.

Age 12: Spent those two weeks in Champaign/Urbana and learned how to deal with downtown Chicago on my own.

And this was all the late 1980s, which I can't really call any safer a time than we are in now. And I think my parents appropriately built up my freedom and responsibilities over time, and I hope to do it the same way with le kid. It's not going to be the same, because our situation isn't the same (unfortunately, our area is pretty "boxed in" by roads I wouldn't feel safe crossing as a pedestrian or bicyclist right now).

I don't really care about people who want to be more paranoid about it, until they start calling me neglectful or irresponsible for following what I believe to be a responsible course. Unfortunately that seems to be far more common nowadays than in the past.


----------



## LynnS6 (Mar 30, 2005)

Oh, but I wanted to add:

For a couple of years when I hit puberty (so 12-13), my mom did restrict me from taking the bus by myself. She explained to me why: Girls your age want to be liked, and they're often afraid to say they're uncomfortable because they want so much to be liked by other people. Sometimes this can lead them to do things they don't want to do.

So, early puberty is a time when my kids will be supervised with a closer eye, but I'll still let them play all they want in the neighborhood!


----------



## Ruthie's momma (May 2, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tanyam926* 
I just don't think that children should be responsible for their own safety. I believe this is disussed in Protecting the Gift by Gavin Debecker (sp?).

I have seen studies that talk about teens' brains and how they are not fully mature enough to fully appreciate the consequences of their actions. I have seen reports about children who when left alone did not listen to their parents' warnings about not touching guns.

W/my own children (6 1/2 and 3 1/2) I def. know they aren't capable of taking care of themselves in case of an emergency. They routinely do things that show lack of adult judgement.

I do feel like there are some parents that hover and that losing that closer knit community means we lose some freedom and sense of safety for the kids.

The reality is that while my kids would probably be safe down the street w/out my supervision, there are a myriad of things that could happen that I am not confidant that they could and should be able to handle on their own.

Interesting discussion though.


----------



## BathrobeGoddess (Nov 19, 2001)

This is fascinating to me...I think we are all pretty well split 50/50

Gavin De Becker is a huge advocate of understanding the difference between actual, instinctual fear and what he calls "manufactured fear" like from television or the internet. He is also big on acknowledging the fears of children and actually listening to them since most abuse will come from someone the child knows and not a stranger. He is fantastic and I have had the privilege to attend two workshops and a seminar with him. I also love his advice about teaching children TO talk to strangers so that they are less of a predator's target and can say no. However, he is also big on giving kids freedom as long as it is developmentally appropriate. Listen to your instincts but you have to have confidence in your instincts...that's the trick! I think that is where all parents need to find the balance...are they irrationally scared to the point that their child's development of life skills they need as adults (because that is what childhood is...a time to learn to be an adult...the idea of childhood as a time to play only manifested after WWII, before that, children were expected to contribute to the household either through labor or through actual work...interestingly the idea that children and childhood was to be sheltered and cherished was championed by BF Skinner, the father of Behaviorism psychology)

Also, did you know that the human brain doesn't actully reach maturity until about age 27? So, full reasoning capabilities don't mature until we are well into adulthood. From an evolutionary stand point, that makes sense...we want out main warriors/protectors/hunters to act and not ponder. Ditto goes for our breeding aged women, we want them to find a mate quickly and have children...(I wasn't at all surprised to learn that a woman's fertility begins to decline around the same time her brain fully matures...)

This is an awesome discussion!


----------



## KatWrangler (Mar 21, 2005)

My first instinct is to protective of my children. But my brain is saying give them some space they will be ok.

We are currently renting a townhouse and only have green space for a backyard and an attached patio. I have been dreading warm weather because I know they will want to be outside and I can't watch them 100% of the time.

So this article I posted is definately food for thought.


----------



## Dar (Apr 12, 2002)

Yeah. It's not that I think children should be responsible for protecting themselves, it's that I don't think there's that much out there to be afraid of. If you live in Gaza I take that back, but for most kids in most of the world....

And the idea that teens are too immature to make good decisions has always irked me. Until the last hundred years or so, teens were considered adults - they were working, marrying, starting families, the whole shebang. Brains are constantly changing - a 50 year old's brain is different from that of a 20 year old, too. Reactions are slower, memory isn't as good, etc... but we never argue that 50 year olds are thus incompetent to care for themselves wisely.

dar


----------



## dearmama22 (Oct 20, 2008)

Thanks for sharing this article!


----------



## lil_miss_understood (Jul 19, 2006)

I'm another one who's honestly more afraid of the people who would see the freedom I would extend my child as "neglectful" than I am of what he might do with the freedom. I trust that my child is intelligent and resourceful and has the common sense to come to me if something "bad" should happen which he is incapable of handling on his own.
Of course, I was also left alone at home for 8-9 hours a day while my parents worked when I was 6 years old. Well, I was left "with" my older brothers (the oldest being 11 at the time), but they took off as soon as my parents left for work.







: And we lived beside the Trans Canada highway. And my dad owned guns, which we knew how to use and weren't locked up. And a whole garage full of woodworking tools which we were totally allowed to use, as long as they were put away and we cleaned up properly after ourselves. I was even allowed to *gasp* cross the HIGHWAY when I was 6 all by myself! And, if I missed the bus, I had to ride my bike to school (a mile each way) when I was 7...
I just find it so crazy how much our perception of what is acceptable and "safe" for children has changed in the last 20 years. I'm not saying that children should be left alone for a week at a time when they're 12 while the parents take off to Mexico, like the incident I remember on the news several years back, but I do think that children are capable of much more responsibility than many seem to think they are and that denying them the opportunity to practice those skills is failing them as a parent in other ways.







:


----------



## bobandjess99 (Aug 1, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *JacquelineR* 
I'm another one who's honestly more afraid of the people who would see the freedom I would extend my child as "neglectful" than I am of what he might do with the freedom. .







:

yes, this!
People are ALWAYS freaking out about how much "freedom" I give my kids. As in..no, they do not have to be surgically connected to me out in public. Yes, it erally is okay they are walking *gasp* 2, 4, 6 even 10 feet away from me!!! Yes,I am watching them and no,I really am not all that worried someone will use that 10 feet of space to run up and snatch them and flee with them.


----------



## Dr.Worm (Nov 20, 2001)

Sooo..you all intrigued me enough that I started to read her blog and then I went to Borders and bought the book..it is actually very good and my mom, who also was afraid, is reading it. And as some of you said to me, you teach your kids the risks. It's not like my DD was never taught anything so then why don't I give her a chance to use her knowledge? Besides the fact that I asked her a few weeks back if she wanted to be free-range and she said no and then I asked her if she just said that because she thought I didn't want her to be..she said she DOES want to. So I am going to try to give her more freedom this summer. I feel bad though..I have been babying her I guess...


----------



## Dr.Worm (Nov 20, 2001)

bump


----------



## SandraS (Jan 18, 2007)

Lenore is SPOT ON with all of her insight. The world is wonderfully safe, my kids can lick the beaters, and child molesters aren't waiting on their front porches with bowls of candy for my kids.

She is now what I would consider a friend, and I've always agreed with her. It's great our kids are as safe as we are!


----------



## PoppyMama (Jul 1, 2004)

I remember my neighbor calling the police when my kids were 2.5 and 4 because they were playing in the yard by themselves. By the time the cop showed up they were happily inside eating lunch and I stood my ground on the playing outside stuff. I have continued to encourage independence and my kids do run our neighborhood at 9 and 11. Sometimes I don't see them for a good chunk of the day and even when I worry a bit I'm learning to suck it up.


----------



## WCM (Dec 15, 2007)

I'm torn (and really appreciating the discussion).

i'm definitly more afraid of being 'caught' parenting how I do, than of my kids being hurt. In our quiet neighbourhood, I'll let them all play around our home, out front, wherever, 'they' being an 8, 6 and 2 year old. They are homeschooled and very attached to me, so going places solo is of no interest to them right now. but I'm not checking on them often. I listen for them, i holler. it works.

but, like me, they are shy and not ones to confidently speak to 'strangers' or other adults.

as a kid I was latch-key, my single mom working her butt off all hours. I walked to after-school classes, where I was bullied in the changeroom. I helped out at her daycare business, where I was molested by a staff member. I rode the bus everywhere, and was regularly 'hit on' by the older male bus drivers.

I never spoke up, never told anyone. Like another post said, I wanted to be liked, plus was shy, had no clue what to say to the big girls who bullied me, nor the old guys on the bus . . . and so it goes.

I want them to feel safe and roam free, but I did, and got hurt at every turn. I cannot change their nature, so how can I 'change' them to be confident, to not look like the shy, easy-prey kids they are, like I was?

I talk about them practicing talking to strangers while I'm right there (asking the time for ex) and they say no way.

WCM


----------



## mommy2two babes (Feb 7, 2007)

I really take issue with this and completely disagree.
We live on a quiet street and I can safely asusme that at least a few parents agree with this theory.

I am the one whos heart is in my throat when I see the 3yo from around the corner dart out in front of my van as I drive to my house. It is a miracle that this kids has not been hit as of yet. Plenty of pepole fly down our street and there are tons of parked cars so you can't see them until they run out.







:

I don't believe that things are more dangerous now then the were then.

When I was younger there were 2 brothers who were allowed to wander town by them selves from a young age.
They went to the store and were very self sufficent the 7 yo looked after his 5 yo brother and thier parents owned a store in town.
As responsible as they were at 5 & 7 it didn't stop the younger brother from slipping and drowning in our local creek. I am sure that thier parents told them to stay away from it.

The older brother blamed himself ( he was only 7 YO!) and never was the same after that. I don't think a child should have that responsibility.
Even as adults we make mistakes/ stupid decisions and don't know what to do at the time.

Finally I know my own children. My DD 4.5 still does not want to go to the bathroom by herself and gets upset when she wakes up alone in bed.
She knows the rules and is good most of the time outside but I have seen her run accross the road without looking when there is someone or something interesting on the other side. DS 2.5 just goes sometimes and I have a hardtime catching up to him. I certainly can't imagine making DD responsible to keep him safe.


----------



## SleeplessMommy (Jul 16, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GuildJenn* 
On the other hand, I think her nostalgia for the 70s is a bit - odd.

In the 70's, I was in KG at a public school. A little boy in 1st grade at my school was playing unsupervised in the woods behind the school. He murdered by a slightly older boy - for a pocket full of coins. I think the boy's nickname was "Lucky".

I think parents should worry MORE about their kids, and make them wear bike helmets when they bicycle on the street around here, especially after dark.


----------



## Ruthla (Jun 2, 2004)

I think it all comes down to balance. You can give kids freedom, but with clear-cut safety rules. Then you peek in on them periodically to make sure the safety rules are being followed- and if they're not, then you take away some of that freedom.

The 3yo who's not observing basic street safety shouldn't be allowed to play in the front yard alone. If that was my neighbor, I'd talk to the parents about my specific concerns, and suggest that they review street-safety with that child. With my own children, I've given out freedom in stages. First we play outside together and I'm constantly reminding them not to go in the street. Once I'm confident that this particular child is mature enough to play in the front yard safely, I start allowing it.

I'm finding this whole "generation gap" conversation interesting, as it's the exact opposite of my own experience. I'm always giving DS freedom to play outside, and it's my Mom who's always worried about the specific things he's doing. At shul, I let him play out in the front yard, while I see one of the grandmas micro-managing her grandkids (meaning DS has to play indoors if he wants to play with those kids, since they're not allowed outside alone.)


----------



## Julia24 (Jun 28, 2004)

Man - great topic!

I really am torn about this with my own children (as is my dh). While I remember learning to ride my bike (IN the street) with the neighborhood children at 5yo (and no parents), and I love those memories, I just can't bring myself to offer that to my own children.

AT 7, my dd still doesn't play out front by herself. (with some other kids her age, I'd allow it, but not by herself) She also only has our street for bike riding - the whole street, but not around it. And only when I'm outside. I do let her play by herself in the back yard, and walk to her friends house without me (but she has to call when she gets there - and it's really on the other side of our block).

I guess the way I see it is "Not MY kid". I just would never forgive myself if I let her go to the park and it HAPPENED to be her that some freak took. And, yes, they may give her right back - when they're done with her - but she'll be RUINED. Maybe not really, but the risk is just not worth the reward in my eyes.

I figure there has to be some kind of happy medium, all in good time, yk? She certainly has more freedom then her 3 yo sister, and I certainly trust her to handle all but the emergency of situations, I just want to BE there to take care of those kinds of things, I'm her MOM, yk? I DO believe in the sibling safety stuff though - already my 3 yo has WAY more freedom than her sister had athe same time, bc I trust my 7 yo with her. (but I also don't expect her to do it all the time either....they each deserve a little autonomy, yk?)

I'm rambling....but I definitely understand and empathize with this internal struggle.


----------



## childsplay (Sep 4, 2007)

Great article!
We are raising our kids like this.... although I didn't know until recently there was an actual label (free range) for them and our parenting style. It's a nice term though, positive...
Our parenting style has always been refered to as irresponsible, different, risky, strange, (and worse!) and our kids have always been 'those kids' (as in "stay away from those kids, what they're doing is dangerous") or "are those your kids because they're....climbing on a rock/in the woods/on the other side of the playground (god forbid!) etc...."
For some reason this generation seems terrified of letting their children go.....but I think it all boils down to what parents are bombarded with on a daily basis. Everything from the local evening news, to headline news, full of horror stories of abducted or murdered children, and that's not even touching the horror we can inflict on our brains by the power of googling these topics!Parenting mags that are chock full of tips on keeping kids safe, sun safety, carseat safety, crib safety, food safety, playground safety, stranger safety, and I'm not saying we should undermine these safety practices, but we should take a minute or two to just sit back and breath....turn off the tv, stop watching the nightly death shows, etc...and follow our instincts, we know how to keep our kids safe, after all it's in our nature to protect them. But in keeping them safe, we have to stop overprotecting and let them figure some things out without mom or dad hovering...like going into a store, alone. I send my younger kids into the grocery store with a list of three or four simple things, and some money. They do fine, they buy the things, they chat with the cashier and they come out to the car. They play outside, for hours upon hours, in the woods. I can't see them, but I trust that they are fine because they've learned by trial and error what's safe and what's not so safe (even if it looks really fun). My 6 y/o walks home from the bus stop. Alone, he stops at the bakery, buys a biscuit, stops and chats with the dog lady. Makes his way home. They sail their own little sailboat all around the bay, they row out to the islands together. My 6 y/o, gets up and goes fishing some mornings, tells me he's going puts on his lifejacket and heads down to the water.
For these few reasons I'm deemed by my peers, irresponsible, crazy, different, even neglectful. Neigborhood moms won't let their kids play with mine because "my kids might lead them into the woods". My SIL actually told her DS in front of me, "don't climb the rocks it's dangerous, they don't care if they get hurt, but I care if you get hurt" I won't even get into my playground experiences! Needless to say we don't frequent playgrounds anymore.

Stepping off my soapbox now


----------



## Cinder (Feb 4, 2003)

I agree that I don't think kidnappings and the like are any more common or likely to happen today... But I can't just let my kids go play like I could as a kid. I had a yard, and woods, and the like, and there was not a major high way for about 20 miles in any direction, and the town we lived in had a population of 700...so heavy traffic just didn't happen. My kids live in Denver, right off a very busy street, less than a mile from many high ways...there are accidents at least twice a week on the corner less than a block from our front porch...we have no yard as we live in an apartment...twice we've had swat teams chase someone on foot with huge guns over there shoulders across the street from our house...our road is the road the fire deparment is on, so they go past our house at like 100mph (for good reason!) at least 10 times per day...

So, I'm not at all afraid of random strangers taking or hurting my kids...but I do not yet trust my kids ability to always look both ways and judge how fast cars are coming at them...


----------



## flapjack (Mar 15, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MayBaby2007* 
I try to see things differently like so many of you. For brief moments, I think about giving my daughter all the freedom that so many say kids need. I was thinking that when I started reading this thread....

....and then I turned on Oprah. She's interviewing the Mccanns (sp?)--the couple who's daughter was abducted in Portugal in May 2007. The kids were apparetnly out of their sight. They checked on the kids every 30 minutes. Mom went to check when 30 minutes were up and one kid was gone.

As much as I would like to think that my kid would be perfectly safe at our small town park (4-5 blocks away) alone, she won't have that opportunity for a long time. Very long. Not sure when--but not in the next 10 years, I'm sure.

Life is too precious to take chances, as Mother Mccann just said. My dd's life is too precious to risk it on giving her the freedom that some say she needs.

There's freedom, and then there's leaving three sleeping toddlers unsupervised in an apartment whilst the parents socialise with their friends. I let my children play out unsupervised before I let them stay in unsupervised because I believe that the world is full of people who will help a child in trouble. Indoors, kids are on their own, and my eldest two are given to the occasional brain fart.
We moved so that my kids can have this freedom. We're now on a cycle route to school and elsewhere, half a mile from the nearest busy road, a playground immediately over a small road, library, Borders- everything a boy could need, really. It's brilliant.


----------



## mamadelbosque (Feb 6, 2007)

I'm with Lenore on this one too. So many parents today are so over protective of their kids its really truely crazy. Yes, bicycle helmets are one thing. Insisting on being with your kid 24/7 till their 15 or 16 is another. My DS' 28 months old and at the park, I hang out with other moms, or sit on a bench and let him play. If he falls down, I cringe, but unless he starts crying and comes running, I don't worry. Other moms I see hover over their kids like they're made of frigging glass and are just going to DIE if they get a scrape or a cut or a bruise anywhere... my DS is rarely free of such things, and you know what? Neither was I!!

When he gets a bit older (say 4-6ish range) if we're living in town by all means I'll let him run around outside by himself - and probably let him keep an eye on his lil bro (i'm due in 4 weeks!!). At this point, he does play outside by himself occasionally - but then again, we're the last ones on a dead end dirt road with essentially no neighbors, so I'm not in the least bit worried about strangers!!

I think about the year I spent in Spain and seeing kids run around together and goto the park without moms & dads. And tis not like Spains any more "safe" of a place than the US. Or like the US is any less "safe" than it was 30 or 40 or 50 years ago. The difference is that now we have CNN, FOX, MSNBC, etc to tell us about all the awful things which are always happening, and before we didn't. Before you had a local newspaper and that was about it, so you weren't constantly bombarded with scary stories about all the awful people in this world doing all sorts of awful stuff. Its not that kids get abducted any more in this day and age, its just that we HEAR about it a LOT more because of technology!!


----------



## SandraS (Jan 18, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamadelbosque* 
I think about the year I spent in Spain and seeing kids run around together and goto the park without moms & dads. And tis not like Spains any more "safe" of a place than the US. Or like the US is any less "safe" than it was 30 or 40 or 50 years ago. The difference is that now we have CNN, FOX, MSNBC, etc to tell us about all the awful things which are always happening, and before we didn't. Before you had a local newspaper and that was about it, so you weren't constantly bombarded with scary stories about all the awful people in this world doing all sorts of awful stuff. Its not that kids get abducted any more in this day and age, its just that we HEAR about it a LOT more because of technology!!

Sadly, we hear about abductions when we shouldn't. The news is so blood-crazed, that when Dad takes the daughter to an amusement park and no one knows, there's an immediate alert and the world thinks there's been "another" kidnapping. When the idiot teenage girl takes off to meet a stranger she met on the internet, it's reported as an abduction. I'll bet you can't count on one hand the number of _real_ kidnappings - NOT Uncle Bob or someone the child knew - in the past few years. It would take something like 200,.000 years for my child to be taken from my front yard. But there's 1 in 600 odds they'll hurt themselves walking across the kitchen floor!









You touched on another an important point. MORE kids play outside, therefore it really takes an already _teeny_ risk and makes it even teenier that anything "bad" will happen (by "bad" I don't mean a broken arm from climbing a tree - which a lot of moms won't let their kids do!). If we weren't such a stuffy society, there would be dozens of kids outside playing, instead of my kids and a few they've convinced it's safe! LOL!

We're very Free Range. My kids are blessed with the confidence, maturity, capability, experience, and judgement to make good decisions because we didn't hover. They play in the fenced back yard alone as soon as they can get there (usually around 18 months). Then by 3 or 4 they can play in the front yard alone (as soon as I know they won't run into the street). By five they're walking to school by themselves. At that point, they pretty much have free reign of the neighborhood. By 8 or 9, they leave in the morning and I'll see them sometimes by dinner, more often by curfew (changes in our state depending on time of year). They have the ability to travel wherever their little legs or bike wheels can get them.

And I know they'll be fine. And they're going to benefit so much from their childhoods!!


----------



## Teenytoona (Jun 13, 2005)

Nodding along with Helen, Emily and Sandra's posts.


----------



## greeneyedmama (Mar 5, 2009)

I agree with much of what Lenore Skenazy has to say. I certainly wish my mother had! She was unbeliebably overprotective. We could never go to friend's houses or spend the night, couldn't walk around Walmart by ourselves(even as teens!), couldn't go to the mall with our friends, nothing. It was a miserable and boring childhood. I'm am not sure how much of it was crazy controlling from my mother, and how much was protectiveness however. I know the latter was a factor because my father's sister was molested/raped repeatedly by a family friend and they were super paranoid about it. But I was so lonely and suffocated I remember thinking that I would rather be molested and have just a little freedom! Isn't that horrible?









So yeah, I want my children to have freedom. I want them to develop trust and confidence in themselves. Autonomy, and self discipline. Things I have problems with to this day! I can definitely be a worrywart and it will hurt to let go at times but I will do my absolute best.


----------



## SandraS (Jan 18, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *greeneyedmama* 
I know the latter was a factor because my father's sister was molested/raped repeatedly by a family friend

But see, that's the key. Walmart was safe for your aunt - her own home wasn't. Sad, I know. But that's the statistic. Strangers are the GOOD people.

People need to police their own family much more than they need to police the mall.

Imagine a world where more people smiled and waved at the old man sitting on a bench instead of wondering if he's some sleezeball? In reality, he's someone's grandpa, who's sat and read "The Night Before Christmas" with his six grandchildren. But we instantly think he's bad - he's male, he's white, he's a stranger. "Without a Trace" did a story about him. KWIM?


----------



## EdnaMarie (Sep 9, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *flapjack* 
There's freedom, and then there's leaving three sleeping toddlers unsupervised in an apartment whilst the parents socialise with their friends. I let my children play out unsupervised before I let them stay in unsupervised because I believe that the world is full of people who will help a child in trouble. Indoors, kids are on their own, and my eldest two are given to the occasional brain fart.
We moved so that my kids can have this freedom. We're now on a cycle route to school and elsewhere, half a mile from the nearest busy road, a playground immediately over a small road, library, Borders- everything a boy could need, really. It's brilliant.

Here's the thing. At some point, we have to admit that there is this gray area where there IS a risk, where a kid COULD get hurt, but we just have to say that it's worth the benefit. There was a thread on the McCanns when it happened. I was appalled at the blame they faced. They were within sight of the room.


----------



## smeisnotapirate (Aug 24, 2007)

My DS is 13mo. He's walking. We're moving to a small town south of the city we live in now, and yes, there is a registered sex offender living 3 blocks down.

Regardless, I let DS wander the (humongous) yard when I'm gardening. I even go in to fill up the watering can and leave him out there for the 2 minutes it takes me. We have a dog who will bark like crazy if anyone decided to come over our property line, and DS is much more interested in the tomatoes or following me around than anything else right now.

I think a really big part of this is that you have to know your neighbours. I'm introducing us to everyone I see on the street - I want people to know and recognize DS and me, and be able to say (when he's older and wandering the neighborhood) "Hmmm... that's Sara's DS in front of my house. Let me make sure he's ok." I want them to have my phone number so that they can call me if they see him somewhere they think he's not supposed to be.

That being said, fear of those people thinking I'm irresponsible for letting my DS go to the store across the street isn't going to make me stop doing it. Every parent knows their child's limitations (I hope) and I think that we need to take that into account when we judge. I know that my 13mo is safe in the yard for 2 minutes while I get water - your 4yo might not be. We need to be less judgemental of each other and get to know each other better. That's the only way to "fix" this kind of problem.


----------



## St. Margaret (May 19, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dar* 
Works for me.

I remember sending my daughter off to the coffee shop a block away from us when she was 7, to buy me a mocha (and I think I funded something for her, too







). It was just a block down a quiet street, but some people freaked. By 10 or so she was wandering around downtown Davis with a friend for a few hours, and by 12 she was flying solo cross country, even changing planes. Once she had a cell phone I really had no worries...

dar

Ah! Davis! In the early 90s we certainly wandered around by ourselves, too. You can bike everywhere and most likely someone you know will be watching you, so everyone behaves. Now, there was still the incident of two teen boys pushing another in front of a train or something, and I remember that being a HUGE deal at the time. But it's not like any of us stopped going around town by ourselves. My mom would give us $10 and tell us to go get lunch and hang out at Longs or wherever, when she had too many day care kids on crazy days. And we'd bike to activities by ourselves, hang out all day... but we just had to tell our parents where we were going to be.


----------



## alexsam (May 10, 2005)

This has been really interesting!

What I've noticed is that we have been talking a lot about trusting the CHILD, but what about trusting OURSELVES to know?

I grew up in Philadelphia in the early '80's. The city was literally bankrupt. Everyone on our street had brake-ins to their homes. The playground was filled with drug waste and condoms. The streets were dangerous with traffic. Philadelphia is a huge east coast urban center and a little kid is easy to loose in the crush. I wasn't going anywhere alone. And I don't blame my parents one bit.

Now, where we live now, there are tons of kids outside. The streets (obviously) still have cars, but our residential roads are pretty quiet. Certainly not anything like the highways and crazy commuters of my childhood. The parks are clean and well kept with lots of neighbors going in and out. We have wide, clean bike lanes. We have local shops. We have a nice fenced yard. My son, when he is older, will be able to pretty much go anywhere. And even now, at almost 5, he can play in our yard "alone" (with our windows open, and it is fenced) and he can play out front with "light" supervision (a few minutes alone if I know what he is doing, longer if all the other kids and parents on the block are out and about), but he is not ready for me to open the door and say "See ya later". There are too many things he is not able to understand or do just yet, bith physically and emotionally. But one day he will be. Tiny steps at a time.

But you know, it is important to trust yourself and to truly be able to assess danger. For small kids, it is sometimes beyond them to stop themselves from running after a ball in the street. Developmentally, kids up to 10 yrs old cannot accurately assess crossing the street due to perception of distance and speed of cars (obviously, having a traffic light or a deserted road are different). It's not easy to tell if a pond is frozen enough for play and the consequences of a kid misjudging that can be really tragic. But not everyone is near a pond. Or lives in a big, decaying city. Some streets are fine for kids to ride around. Some are not.

WE need to not only teach and trust our kids, but we need to trust OURSELVES to make solid decisions. We have to know OUR dangers.

Also, some stuff that we do now for safety is just plain stupid not to do. There is some country song that was out last year that talks about "When we were kids, we drank from the garden hose, all our moms smoked, yada, yada and we're just fine". Well, duh. We KNOW now there is a BIG difference from the risks of drinking from a garden hose and smoking while pregnant. For goodness sake, SOME things are NOT paranoia. Some things are true advancements in safety that save lives. Carseats. Bike helmets. Pool fences. Suntan lotion. CO detectors. The trick is to know, then do without being carried away.

And some things HAVE changed. There is more violence and ads on tv and video games. That is a fact. Our parents never had to wonder if we were IM'ing 30 yr old guys or calling them on our cell phones or if they were snapping pictures of eachother in compromising positions and posting them on the internet - kids have more ways to connect and can do it in a bigger way with more privacy from their parents because of technology. In many ways, attitudes toward sexuality have changed. Kids have more influence in financial decisions and marketing is much more aggressive. Keeping your head in the sand doesn't change all this.

Really- we have to be informed and trust ourselves as well as our kids.


----------



## EdnaMarie (Sep 9, 2006)

Quote:

And some things HAVE changed. There is more violence and ads on tv and video games. That is a fact. Our parents never had to wonder if we were IM'ing 30 yr old guys or calling them on our cell phones or if they were snapping pictures of eachother in compromising positions and posting them on the internet - kids have more ways to connect and can do it in a bigger way with more privacy from their parents because of technology. In many ways, attitudes toward sexuality have changed. Kids have more influence in financial decisions and marketing is much more aggressive. Keeping your head in the sand doesn't change all this.
No, we used landlines and they could take pictures of us and put them in underground porno magazines. We had D&D with as many gruesome scenarios as you could think up if you wanted. We had our walkmans and our imaginations. We could sit by the side of the pool and unknowingly be flirting with a friend's dad! We could have gotten into any of those cars at the Circle K where we were sent to buy cigarettes for mom, which were sold to us because they guy knew our mom







.

Sorry, I'm not buying the technology argument. I grew up knowing not to touch a syringe or a condom because it probably had HIV on it- and I had to know this because they were underfoot at the park. And I'm a reasonably "old" mommy, 32! Who has kids now that did not grow up with pushers (coke, crack, heroin, all the goodies, right?) at their middle school, marijuana behind the football stadium, and kids drinking and driving? Who remembers having a phone in her room? Heathers, anyone?

It's the same old thing, old fogies worried that somehow, some new technology is going to really make things incomprehensible. But while I am aware that the cell phone can bring independence, I also know there's only 24 hours in a day to screw off, which is the same as we all had.


----------



## smeisnotapirate (Aug 24, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *EdnaMarie* 
No, we used landlines and they could take pictures of us and put them in underground porno magazines. We had D&D with as many gruesome scenarios as you could think up if you wanted. We had our walkmans and our imaginations. We could sit by the side of the pool and unknowingly be flirting with a friend's dad! We could have gotten into any of those cars at the Circle K where we were sent to buy cigarettes for mom, which were sold to us because they guy knew our mom







.

Sorry, I'm not buying the technology argument. I grew up knowing not to touch a syringe or a condom because it probably had HIV on it- and I had to know this because they were underfoot at the park. And I'm a reasonably "old" mommy, 32! Who has kids now that did not grow up with pushers (coke, crack, heroin, all the goodies, right?) at their middle school, marijuana behind the football stadium, and kids drinking and driving? Who remembers having a phone in her room? Heathers, anyone?

It's the same old thing, old fogies worried that somehow, some new technology is going to really make things incomprehensible. But while I am aware that the cell phone can bring independence, I also know there's only 24 hours in a day to screw off, which is the same as we all had.

ITA.









Whenever I start thinking that the world is more dangerous now, I stop and think about all the ridiculously stupid, unsafe things I did as a kid - and I'm only 24. At 11, I was buying pot for a girlfriend from the janitor at my high school. I never had a cell phone - so when I snuck out of my friends' sleepover to my boyfriend's house, my mom couldn't get in touch with me, and nobody else could either.

There's a balance. Technology brings new problems, but also new solutions. If I had had a cell phone in high school, I probably would have been safer - my mom would have been able to reach me more often and I'd have had to stay away from loud parties and not be totally stoned at friends' houses for fear of her calling and KNOWING (because moms always know







).

Kids will get in trouble and do unsafe things - it's a given. It's about building trust between us and our kids, not about shielding them from things.


----------



## kay4 (Nov 30, 2004)

I sooo want to not worry but I do. Not about my kids doing something 'wrong' (though that could happen) It is about things like cars or dogs or other people. I worry if they are riding bikes in front of a house that they will get hit. Or they will be chased by a stray dog (it's happened twice) or a weirdo neighbor.


----------



## EdnaMarie (Sep 9, 2006)

Too true about phones being safety devices!

Can you imagine that at 16, 16, 15 and 15, we used to drive two hours to the nearest large city to spend the weekend with a friend's older brother?

Without a phone in anyone's hand? And only enough money to pay for three meals a day at Taco Bell? And no credit cards, that goes without saying.

And now at more than twice that age my mom asks me if I have my phone when I drive 35 minutes to the supermarket.









Quote:

At 11, I was buying pot for a girlfriend from the janitor at my high school.
AAAAAIIIII no, no, you're not helping this discussion for our side anymore...


----------



## lil_miss_understood (Jul 19, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *EdnaMarie* 
AAAAAIIIII no, no, you're not helping this discussion for our side anymore...









I can think of far worse things, tbh. Not saying I approve of it but... Frankly, that's part of growing up- learning to deal with that kind of thing. Should kids learn to deal with it that young? Maybe, maybe not. Who am I to say yes or no for every child?







: But that's our job as parents- to teach our children what our values are and what we believe they should do in just such a situation, right? So that they'll do so, even when we're NOT around.
I'm of the opinion that the more closely they're "guarded" when they're younger, the less likely they are to employ their own intelligence in such situations as they grow up and opens them up to peer pressure. But that's my opinion.

ETA: Not saying they shouldn't be protected at all, just saying that they do require some room to try out new feathers when they get them.


----------



## claddaghmom (May 30, 2008)

imo i think a lot of parents have turned the natural, good aspect of fearing for children and wanting to protect them into a very disordered manifestation.

i can't help but see inconsistencies in risk assessment.

how many children are correctly restrained and properly installed carseats? um, i have yet to meet someone who can say yes to this. oh and no one irl rfaces past a year.

yet how many people freak out about iron lungs and death...and fully vaccinate their children?

does anyone even know how risky it is to drive? and how rare it is to contract a vaccine related disease...and even rarer to have a complication from it?

we're called to be terrified of some stranger abducting our child...when statistically our children have a greater chance of being hit by lightning.

yet how many people care about what gerber/nestle do? how many people care about what their kids eat?

we freak if our child needs to go to the bathroom in public. it's easy to make this situation safe w/o freaking.

yet how many people screen family members before allowing them to babysit? how many people turn a blind eye to family incest or touchy neighbors or a doting teacher? the statistics say 80% of victims know their perpetrator.

i can't think of any aspect of danger in America where the parents properly use fear. we are really messed up.


----------



## kay4 (Nov 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *claddaghmom* 
i can't think of any aspect of danger in America where the parents properly use fear. we are really messed up.

what about cars??? Sorry but that is my main #1 fear when my kids walk out the door


----------



## Sailor (Jun 13, 2006)

I was raised with a lot of freedom. The first 5 years, I spent in Europe, where me and 3 other kids my age played outside alone. At age 5 - we rode our bikes everywhere, went to the store to pick up some basic ingredients for our parents, had fun on the playgrounds together, etc. Now, we did live in a neighborhood complex where cars weren't allowed. The garages were like 3 miles away, lol. So, that was a bonus.

But, this is a country where you leave your newborn in the stroller, outside, while you go into a grocery store. At any given time, you can see 5 plus strollers lined up outside of various stores. It's just not a country that has this "someone will steal my baby" obsession.

Then, we moved to Philadelphia, and in 4th grade I walked to and from school - sometimes alone, and sometimes with a friend. I also went to the playground to meet up with friends, no parents were there. By 4th grade (age 8/9) - I pretty much knew that getting hit by a car = not a good idea. And so I knew how to cross the street without that happening.

Nothing ever happened to me or any of my friends, and I never felt in danger. I don't think that was luck. It was just being smart - I learned not to speak with strangers, to leave if I felt unsafe, to yell for help if needed, etc. At the same time, I wasn't ever afraid that anything would happen. I was taught common sense, basically.

It wasn't until I became an adult that I noticed all this .... fear people had. I often think that a lot of the fear is unfounded. I just don't believe that in 2009 there are, all of a sudden, millions more pedophiles/kidnappers/murderers/etc. than there were when I was a kid in the 1980s and 1990s. It's probably the same amount. It's just that society, as a whole, has become so fear based.


----------



## claddaghmom (May 30, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kay4* 
what about cars??? Sorry but that is my main #1 fear when my kids walk out the door









Well, what I am trying to say is that the general 'they' aren't using that feeling of fear effectively.

I'm not saying the fear itself is invalid.

For example, I know there are some very educated mamas on MDC who selectively vax. They have a fear of particular things, they researched it and they applied it effectively.

But the general 'out there' ideas? Nah. It's just this one big sponge of anxiety and blood and gore.

Maybe I've just had too many people say, "But your baby could DIE!"

Yes, we do all die. I prefer to use my scant energy and what's left of my 24hrs to plan against the most obvious, most frequent methods of death.









(and in short: i suppose being hit by a car is a good one!)


----------



## SandraS (Jan 18, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *claddaghmom* 
imo i think a lot of parents have turned the natural, good aspect of fearing for children and wanting to protect them into a very disordered manifestation.

i can't help but see inconsistencies in risk assessment.


I think it's all in each of our _personally_ determined "calculated risk" beliefs. I know people that have died in car wrecks, but I certainly won't stop driving. I hope we're okay, but sure, the possibility is there that something could happen. We lick the beaters. There's a risk, sure. Heck, at the risk of being totally attacked, I will admit that the netting on our trampoline fell off a year after it was put on and my kids freely jump, with neighbors and friends, without "protection". So do the 4 and 1 year old. And, knock on wood, nothing's happened. But what IF a broken arm happened? Well, we'd deal with it and move on. Would we change anything? Nah. It's worked well. For US. Others would be freaking out, replace the net twice, or get rid of it.

Others fear driving. Some fear tummy sleeping. Others fear the family bed. It's all in a personal comfort level. I think it's wild that there are women so scared to even _smell_ a cup of coffee while pregnant, or lay on the "wrong" side, yet ask for dangerous drugs the minute the first contraction comes.

This is their _personal calculated risk_. Or sometimes, in the case of the drugs, just ignorance as to the actual risks.

My biggest point, however, is that those that fear the stranger in the public bathroom so much that their child at the age of 10 isn't allowed to use it, is doing a huge disservice to their child, and themselves. Ride your child rear facing until they get their own driver's license, whatever - sure, accidents happen in vehicles a LOT. But kids abducted in restrooms? Eh, not gonna happen.

I think that's what you're talking about, at least.


----------



## alexsam (May 10, 2005)

About the cell phones and technology- I'm not saying better or worse, just that it is different and was not around when we were kids and parents need to be aware and understand it. It *can* be a danger if used imporperly and/or if parents are cluelesss as to how it works or ignorant of signs of troubl or potential danger with it.

The world isn't the same and to say "Ah, its no different than when I was a kid!"... Well, it is different (sometimes in ways not easily seen, like the significant uptick in marketing and the changing images on TV because these have happened slowly and have a more cumulative effect) in the methods of trouble sometimes and parents need to at least be aware.

And just as a scenario- not others taking clandestine pictures of you to market to an underground porno, but my opthomologist was telling how her tween daughter and her friend took some giggly sleepover and suggestive videos and were uploading them to youtube to "share with their friends". We did versions of this too as kids (took silly and more "grown up" pictures at sleepovers), but didn't have the chance to share it with 100 million people at the click of a button and our privacy was a bit easier to preserve, at least on that scale. Sure, there were other ways to get into trouble, but not *this* way and we should at least know it is there.


----------



## EdnaMarie (Sep 9, 2006)

But there's a privacy setting on YouTube. And frankly, those kind of videos are not going to get a ton of hits, just like if they sent them to a bunch of porno mags, they wouldn't get published. They're not as interesting as we might fear, not to most people, anyway.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *alexsam* 
About the cell phones and technology- I'm not saying better or worse, just that it is different and was not around when we were kids and parents need to be aware and understand it. It *can* be a danger if used imporperly and/or if parents are cluelesss as to how it works or ignorant of signs of troubl or potential danger with it.

The world isn't the same and to say "Ah, its no different than when I was a kid!"... Well, it is different (sometimes in ways not easily seen, like the significant uptick in marketing and the changing images on TV because these have happened slowly and have a more cumulative effect) in the methods of trouble sometimes and parents need to at least be aware.

And just as a scenario- not others taking clandestine pictures of you to market to an underground porno, but my opthomologist was telling how her tween daughter and her friend took some giggly sleepover and suggestive videos and were uploading them to youtube to "share with their friends". We did versions of this too as kids (took silly and more "grown up" pictures at sleepovers), but didn't have the chance to share it with 100 million people at the click of a button and our privacy was a bit easier to preserve, at least on that scale. Sure, there were other ways to get into trouble, but not *this* way and we should at least know it is there.


----------



## Youngfrankenstein (Jun 3, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SandraS* 
I think it's wild that there are women so scared to even _smell_ a cup of coffee while pregnant, or lay on the "wrong" side, yet ask for dangerous drugs the minute the first contraction comes.












No kidding...


----------



## VroomieMama (Oct 9, 2008)

I'm on fence. I agree that it is good to encourage our children to have freedom so they can be independent and confident. On the other hand, I don't feel comfortable having other parents judging me as a bad mother by thinking that I don't care for my children then they don't want their children to go near my house or etc OR someone snatching my children and I never get to see them again.







KWIM.


----------



## smeisnotapirate (Aug 24, 2007)

I had a friend tell me once that we have no right to know what others think about us. I try to think of that as often as I can.


----------



## mamadelbosque (Feb 6, 2007)

Yeah, things have changed. Now we all have laptops & cable & cell phones. But all thats changed is the *technology* - PEOPLE haven't changed. And thats what it comes down to. The vast, vast, vast, vast majority of people in this world are GOOD & HELPFUL & TRUSTABLE - the tiny itsy bitsy minority that are going to rob, rape, kidnap, kill or otherwise harm you is tiny, and it always had been. The difference today isn't that theres more of it, its not that theres MORE pedeophiles or MORE rapists or MORE thieves or murderers or whatever. Its that we *HEAR* about them more.

And so, we *THINK* that there just must be more of them than when we/our parents/grandparents were kids. But there aren't. Its just that the technology has changed - now instead of the nightly news on CBS, NBC or ABC we have 24/7 news coverage on MSNBC, CNN, CNN Headline News, FOX news, and random news bites on a dozen other channels. We hear about the kid getting kidnapped in Washington - only to have it quietly dropped when they "find" her with her dad who just forgot to tell mom where they were going. We happen to know about the pedophile down the street because our we have laws which mandate that they register - where as they used to just move in quietly and everybody went on with their lives. Its not that theres MORE actual crime or MORE actual criminals - its just that we hear about what there is much more. And so, we learn to fear more.

But theres just no reason to. Because probably there was a pedophile down the street when you were a kid too. You just didn't know he/she was a pedophile - you knew him as the creepy guy down the street whose house you avoided. There just wasn't an amber alert system, so your friends mom couldn't report her missing when her dad picked her up from school w/o tell her. Etc.


----------



## Sionainne (Jan 23, 2008)

In the salon article from the OP, the FRK author says:

"My big idea is: 'Take Our Children to the Park and Leave Them There Day.' I think that would be a great thing for our country."

Why haven't I seen 10,000 meetup events like this happening across the USA? I think it's because it just doesn't sound like a good idea to a lot of people.


----------



## EdnaMarie (Sep 9, 2006)

Did you see the post in parenting where a woman's neighbours called the cops on her because her toddler escaped and was running down the street with her in tow?

I think this isn't happening because people don't want to get arrested or have their kids taken by CPS or get a mark on their record, in case of a divorce that ends in a custody proceeding. It's litigation that scares most people about this (including me!).

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sionainne* 
In the salon article from the OP, the FRK author says:

"My big idea is: 'Take Our Children to the Park and Leave Them There Day.' I think that would be a great thing for our country."

Why haven't I seen 10,000 meetup events like this happening across the USA? I think it's because it just doesn't sound like a good idea to a lot of people.


----------



## Cinder (Feb 4, 2003)

I was thinking about this thread this weekend cause we rented season 6 of penn and tellers bullshit. Anyway, one of the episodes is about stranger danger, it's a good episode.





http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHPUo...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0b1XC...eature=related


----------



## SandraS (Jan 18, 2007)

I LOVE P&T!!

Last week they were showing the BS behind thinking a video game creates killers... they're fantastic!


----------



## Cinder (Feb 4, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SandraS* 
I LOVE P&T!!

Last week they were showing the BS behind thinking a video game creates killers... they're fantastic!

definitely!


----------



## EnviroBecca (Jun 5, 2002)

Quote:

I think this isn't happening because people don't want to get arrested or have their kids taken by CPS or get a mark on their record








 This is what I tell my 4-year-old when he wants to stay in the car while I go into a store: "I know you would stay in your seat and wait safely for me. But lots of people think kids are not safe alone, especially in a parking lot, and they would call the police and get us into trouble." One time he asked a lot of questions about exactly what kind of trouble, and the answers were a bit disturbing to him, but I still think it's better than telling him he can't stay in the car because he WOULD get kidnapped, as many parents do!

Penn & Teller's show is pretty good in general, but the one about recycling was garbage.







:


----------



## Cinder (Feb 4, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *EnviroBecca* 







This is what I tell my 4-year-old when he wants to stay in the car while I go into a store: "I know you would stay in your seat and wait safely for me. But lots of people think kids are not safe alone, especially in a parking lot, and they would call the police and get us into trouble." One time he asked a lot of questions about exactly what kind of trouble, and the answers were a bit disturbing to him, but I still think it's better than telling him he can't stay in the car because he WOULD get kidnapped, as many parents do!

Penn & Teller's show is pretty good in general, but the one about recycling was garbage.







:

eh, I think the second hand smoke one was a little off as well, but I watch it mostly for entertainment, I mean, they are magicians/comedians...

Anyway, isn't the reason you shouldn't leave your kid in a car due to temps, like when it's 90 out the car can become 130 in like 10 minutes, not due to kidnappings? Anyway, I couldn't leave my kids alone in the car...if I leave them alone in their bedroom for 10 minutes they draw on the walls (rented apartment, so not allowed, and they know this), I don't want to know what thing they know not to do that they would do if left alone in the car for 10 minutes.


----------



## EdnaMarie (Sep 9, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *EnviroBecca* 







This is what I tell my 4-year-old when he wants to stay in the car while I go into a store: "I know you would stay in your seat and wait safely for me. But lots of people think kids are not safe alone, especially in a parking lot, and they would call the police and get us into trouble." One time he asked a lot of questions about exactly what kind of trouble, and the answers were a bit disturbing to him, but I still think it's better than telling him he can't stay in the car because he WOULD get kidnapped, as many parents do!


nak

i say that too! "you need to do X because otherwise someone will say i'm not taking care of you and they might want to give you a new mommy." (she doesn't care about "trouble" lol)


----------



## PreggieUBA2C (Mar 20, 2007)

I am also of a mixed mind, not regarding children's needs for freedom, but just how that plays out in my life. And I'm becoming seriously weary of how often I also have to tell my children that we do xyz because other people are uncomfortable if we don't/might think they are not being cared for and remove them from our home and family, etc...

We live in the woods, and in bear country. For this reason, we have a large range with a bright blue string tied tree-to-tree to mark the perimeter of the area that I feel comfortable about them being without supervision. We have no fences and our three oldest play outside around the cabin and to the markers all day with a window open for me to hear them. We also have geese, who I trust to provide an advanced warning system, unless they were to hide instead- there's no real telling what they'd do if faced with a grizzly or black bear or cougar.

Anyway, it's usually in town where we have all of these manufactured rules about walking proximity and wandering ranges. In the deli, ds1 wandered around out of sight for a long while once he'd finished eating and i still was. At the park, all of my dc go in whatever directions they choose, and I do keep a closer eye on our 20 mo. old, but even he is often at the other end of the playground.

For the youngest, the most common problem is when others try to stop him from doing what he is competent or willing to risk doing. I don't climb with him or hover unless he's asked me to, which is next to never unless the challenge is completely new to him.

If we had a dog, I don't think I would be even as concerned about safety as I barely am now.







I would let the three older ones wander with the dog, but this is a very rural area with dirt roads and not a city.

*I* feel tense in the city, and so do my dc. We're just not used to the pace of the city, but even so, I am happy to let them run a block ahead, from light to light.

My biggest concern about the city is that while I rust my dc, people in general aren't anticipating children even being there like they did when I was a child. In parking lots, it is imperative that I have all of their hands because drivers simply are not looking for their little bodies way down there. They see me, though. In the streets which here are very pedestrian-friendly and even in stores, my dc are commonly nearly knocked over by fast-moving, unaware people whose gaze simply doesn't meet the little people. My dc have not been knocked over because they are very adept at maneuvering their bodies to avoid it, but the adults are clearly not aware and when they become aware, after near-misses, they apologise to me, surprised by having such a close encounter with a little one. I see this all the time.

I don't think that's reason to hole up, though, just something to consider and maybe remedy with fluorescent orange hats.









I was extremely free-range as a child, in many diverse neighbourhoods and cities in Canada, and lots of dangerous things happened to me, injurious to this day. I do wish my parents had been more aware and concerned for my safety. They didn't consider the environment or my needs. If I said that I was afraid to walk home in the dark, they said I'd be fine. I wasn't always. I was also taught to suppress my instincts. Bad combo, imo.

So, my solution is to assess the environment, my child's abilities and desires, encourage their instinctual development and awareness, help them strategise and work through things as they want my help, and otherwise, to let them learn, which I think they are innately competent to do.

Our children wander further away as they are comfortable, just like when they were babies. They have a sense of how far is too far, I think, except the 20 mo. old presently- or maybe it is just me... hard to tell...









We also equip them with observations in situations they haven't encountered, like at the family park day we happened across on the weekend. We just pointed to a few things so they'd be aware of their presence. Then they ran about the various tents and activities and I stayed with our 20 mo. old while he wandered over to listen to the music in the front row.

When it was time to go, the three oldest all knew where the others were, even though they'd gone in different directions, and we gathered and left together.

I am learning how to apply my understanding and being open to our dc's expressions of needs and desires every day, and this aspect of being together seems to be in constant flux too, according to our situation.

I guess I just anticipate that we'll all adapt to whatever we need to, and given that we're making a conscious effort to meet one another's needs, even if I miss some and mess up some, and some more, my dc will have learned well enough what they need to go around me if I'm the obstacle- though I'd rather never be that!

I hope to be more like a lighthouse they can rely on to be there when they want to come home. Always there, always welcoming and indicating a safe and warm place to be, and to leave as desired. I try to be that in everything and everywhere for them.


----------



## EdnaMarie (Sep 9, 2006)

Today I let my almost-three wander while I paid for the Y nursery. She was within earshot, playing "hide-and-seek" (i.e. dart and watch mommy freak) by running into the women's locker room. A lady urged her out and glared at me. As if I wouldn't have people glaring at me if I were making a red mark on her arm holding her and scowling as she flailed around.







:

So the point is, what did my daughter learn from that?

She learned that strangers return you to your mama.







Good job, lady!


----------



## fork (Feb 7, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *EdnaMarie* 
Today I let my almost-three wander while I paid for the Y nursery. She was within earshot, playing "hide-and-seek" (i.e. dart and watch mommy freak) by running into the women's locker room. A lady urged her out and glared at me. As if I wouldn't have people glaring at me if I were making a red mark on her arm holding her and scowling as she flailed around.







:

So the point is, what did my daughter learn from that?

She learned that strangers return you to your mama.







Good job, lady!

This is interesting. In that same thread where the mama got the police called, many people chimed in about how their child ran off and people just let them go by, or held a door open. Seems if you happen to run into a loose kid and you help out and bring the kid back to mom your a rude person, and if you just let them do their thing you are a rude and uncaring person.

Personally, if I see a stray kid, I don't worry about it. Unless the kid is visibly upset, or being chased by an adult saying "stop that kid", I'm just going to go about my business.

I have so many fond memories of being out an about, doing my own thing, as a kid. I took the bus in kindy, rode my bike around the neighborhood, walked to the corner store, got into some trouble, and dealt with bullies all by myself. Lots of learning experiences that I wouldn't have had if mom was following me around.

The one time something really bad happend, it was when I was in the front yard while my mom was unloading things from the car into the house. Two men in a van stopped in front of the house and called me over asking my name. The passenger started getting out of the van, and I screamed my fool head off and ran for the house. By the time my I got into the house and my mom came outside they were gone. I was afraid to go outside for a few weeks.

My point is that bad things can happen regardless of how "right there" you are. Life is full of things you can't control, and living in fear of that 1 in a million thing happening to you or your kid is no way to live.


----------



## SandraS (Jan 18, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *fork* 
My point is that bad things can happen regardless of how "right there" you are. Life is full of things you can't control, and living in fear of that 1 in a million thing happening to you or your kid is no way to live.

It's funny you said this. I once got seriously slammed for letting my 18+ month old(s) out in the back yard alone to play - they figured out the dog door, they head out, they play in a wonderful safe 6' fenced back yard with sandboxes, swingsets, whatever. I'm inside, the back of the house has windows and the big glass door, and I can see them whenever I look up... so they're fine. I love it.

Anyways, the only time (so far, knock on wood) either of my girls ever got hurt - like blood and maybe scar hurt - was when _Daddy was back there sitting on the deck_ and Autumn came running at him so he would catch her and she tripped and fell and hit her forehead on the corner of the deck! Daddy was less than 2 feet from her, but she got hurt.

Gasp!

I've often been told that "they'll get hurt playing by themselves" in the back yard. Sure, they could. And they can get hurt with someone less than 30 inches from them too! I'm betting every mom here has a story similar... you just can't bubble wrap them - nor would I want to.


----------



## aran (Feb 9, 2005)

Disclaimer: I didn't read the whole article and I didn't read the whole thread.

BUT - I think the safety culture that has grown around kids has made them safer, and the way it is practiced by most people I know, it has not stunted their development.

I was raised with huge latitude in the 70s, I think because my mom raised my brothers and sisters in the 50s and 60s, and was so lax with them it would be considered criminal by today's standards. But I was often frightened, I think I experienced a lot of stuff too early, I learned to be tough and jaded, and got hurt way more than I wanted to. I was attacked by dogs several times, was subject to bullying pretty regularly, and had older kids try sexual games with me. None of that kind of stuff has come into play for me as an adult, though, and I don't think going through it prepared me for anything I have done in my adult life. I would have liked a little more adult presence!

Anyhow - I wanted to post to show that death by accidents (not including motor vehicle accidents) in the US has been declining steadily for kids in the past decades. I think that our "safety culture" in the US has led to this change and I applaud it wholeheartedly. Here is a summary of the data from the CDC web site:

*Number of average annual deaths per 100,000 people due to accidents (excludes motor vehicle accidents)*

.......................*AGE RANGE
Year span.......< 1....1-4...5-14*
1960-1964........88.....31.....19
1965-1969........80.....33.....20
1970-1974........57.....31.....20
1975-1979........38.....27.....17
1980-1984........28.....23.....14
1985-1989........25.....20.....12
1990-1994........23.....17.....10
1995-1998........20.....14.....9

What can you take away from these data? Either:

(1) gee, kids are safer now so we should loosen up. OR
(2) wow, all that safety consciousness has really helped, let's keep it up!

I am all for #2!

Also note that these are data for deaths only - simply because better data are kept on deaths than injuries. I assume the injury rates are much higher, and also follow the same decreasing trend. For most people, injury rates are more relevant...


----------



## SandraS (Jan 18, 2007)

That's not the only information that should be taken into account.

Kids ARE safer today. There are NOT molesters around every corner, murderers lurking in the mall, rapists standing in the grocery store. Those are the stats that you need to review. Crime stats. Things like that. Lenore does a great job on her site of covering those.

But hey, it's a free (and safe) world - you can do what you choose with your children. I'm sorry you had a personally bad experience - I know people who have died in auto wrecks, and I've had two myself - but that doesn't mean I can prevent my children from riding in a car, KWIM? Again, it's _calculated risk_. I freely let my kids roam because I know they're going to be fine. No worries here!


----------



## aran (Feb 9, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SandraS* 
That's not the only information that should be taken into account.

Kids ARE safer today. There are NOT molesters around every corner, murderers lurking in the mall, rapists standing in the grocery store. Those are the stats that you need to review. Crime stats. Things like that. Lenore does a great job on her site of covering those.

But hey, it's a free (and safe) world - you can do what you choose with your children. I'm sorry you had a personally bad experience - I know people who have died in auto wrecks, and I've had two myself - but that doesn't mean I can prevent my children from riding in a car, KWIM? Again, it's _calculated risk_. I freely let my kids roam because I know they're going to be fine. No worries here!

Yeah, so you choose interpretation (1) of the data I posted. Fine for you - not for me. I understand risk assessment - I do it for a living







That's why I am not so worried about abductions and crime, and I didn't post anything about that. _I posted about accidents because that's what I am trying to avoid by supervising my kids at the level that I do._


----------



## EdnaMarie (Sep 9, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *fork* 
This is interesting. In that same thread where the mama got the police called, many people chimed in about how their child ran off and people just let them go by, or held a door open. Seems if you happen to run into a loose kid and you help out and bring the kid back to mom your a rude person, and if you just let them do their thing you are a rude and uncaring person..

The scowl was rude, not her actions, and I smiled at her and thanked her because I knew she was just trying to help. I was just annoyed that she felt the need to give me a "look". I return kids to their parents all the time at the Y (and the supermarket) but I don't scowl! And I hope I'm teaching them to be trusting.

Anyway, re: accidents, what kind of accidents are those? I'm not opposed to putting bleach on the top shelf (or keeping it out of the house altogether), putting outlet covers on electrical outlets, etc. I am opposed to keeping kids on such a short leash that they're never alone and never have the chance to develop their own instincts.

And if kids are still just as at risk because they spend more time in the car getting driven to "safe" places to play, but die in the car on the way there, vs. dying in the backyard, frankly, what's the difference? A child is a child, a loss is a loss.

Finally, molestation, kidnapping, and murder- what people so often bring up when they worry about a kid at a park alone- are not "accidents".

So I don't find that list compelling counter-evidence.


----------



## transformed (Jan 26, 2007)

I think:

Amen.


----------



## choli (Jun 20, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *aran* 
Anyhow - I wanted to post to show that death by accidents (not including motor vehicle accidents) in the US has been declining steadily for kids in the past decades. I think that our "safety culture" in the US has led to this change and I applaud it wholeheartedly. Here is a summary of the data from the CDC web site:

*Number of average annual deaths per 100,000 people due to accidents (excludes motor vehicle accidents)*

.......................*AGE RANGE
Year span.......< 1....1-4...5-14*
1960-1964........88.....31.....19
1965-1969........80.....33.....20
1970-1974........57.....31.....20
1975-1979........38.....27.....17
1980-1984........28.....23.....14
1985-1989........25.....20.....12
1990-1994........23.....17.....10
1995-1998........20.....14.....9

What can you take away from these data? Either:

(1) gee, kids are safer now so we should loosen up. OR
(2) wow, all that safety consciousness has really helped, let's keep it up!

I am all for #2!

Also note that these are data for deaths only - simply because better data are kept on deaths than injuries. I assume the injury rates are much higher, and also follow the same decreasing trend. For most people, injury rates are more relevant...

I think it's interesting that the biggest drop is for children under 1 year old - those least likely to be affected by playing unsupervised. So I won't have any regrets about letting my children have a childhood.


----------



## Sionainne (Jan 23, 2008)

Mamas (and Papas), I love all you guys. Until someone has walked a mile in your shoes, it's too easy for me to say "Unlike me who is enlightened, you are obviously motivated by an overly abundant attitude of __________ in the world"

Has anyone ever read "My Side Of The Mountain" (fiction)? It is fantastic! It features the ultimate and I would say, only true free range kid there has ever been. I think Sam is about 11 or 12 yo. He had a great time -- I think most people fantasize about having the kind of boy's life the protagonist did: He left home in NYC to live alone in some old family land in the Catskills. He built a little house inside a giant tree. He had a trained falcon as a best friend and small game hunter. He made all his winter clothes and shoes out of deerskins. He entertains occasional human guests in his tree cave house. He completely lived off the land. (And had he broken his leg anywhere in the mountains, he would've been screwed and probably died in the woods) His free rangeness ended when, after being gone from home for about 1 year in the Catskills Mtns, his parents and sibs coms to see him in the mountains. He's elated to see them. He learns they plan to build a house right there on his side of the mountain and protests. His mom basically says something like: "Sam, when you're 18 years old, you can do as you like. But until then, all the law I can find says I have to take care of you. And my way of taking you means a having house with walls and a door." So her and his interpretation of "MAMA IS CLOSING IN" is actually having to live inside a house for most for the year.

The ending is really good (I haven't given it away) with what it implies. If you are feeling up in the air about all the FR stuff, check out this book at the library. The book's ending (as opposed to the movie's ending) is very appropos to this discussion of FR-ness.

Just like the statement "I'm an AP parent, and you're not. I can't believe you're not AP. You and yours will suffer for it" is uninteresting, so is substituting "I'm a FR parent and you're not. I can't believe you're not FR. You and yours will suffer for it". Unless you can prove your AP-ness by some universal ex-utero standard for AP-ness like there is for citizenship, it just don't matter. People do give up some AP longings in light of some harsh realities like car seats even if the baby cries in protest. Then there's diapering and EC. By definition, the only true AP parent is a biological mama who is still attached her baby in the womb via umbilical cord. So the purists' definition is a little restrictive and basically weird but this _is_ the only literally true AP parent. Short of that, all AP is an attitude manifest into actions. And one's actions always must find balance to get along in life. Otherwise I suppose you become an extremist and, for FR-ers, maybe start arguing for lowering the # of police force and EMS everywhere (world is safer right?), and the emancipation of all minors lest they experience tyranny in the form of parenting and denial of total freedom.

I am surprised that FRK has gathered any attention. Just more evidence that parents with enough money and time on their hands will buy another book feeding their neurosis that they are doing something wrong. While FRK happens to empower parents to take a nap in the good name of children's lib, that's fine but there is nothing new in this. One must, however, recognize that it is trial by fire. I doubt the Walshes or McCanns advocate the FRK book. I doubt the author would even want the McCanns endorsement. I doubt anyone advertises in Craigslist for free range babysitters. (Or maybe they _would_. I won't judge them if they do. I'm just saying I think it is _very unlikely_ they do and obvious to me why)

Here's an activity for the kids to experience freedom ... (you're waiting for a bookish answer from me aren't you?) ... start by pretending they already have it, and help them love, really love and cherish, what they have.


----------



## EnviroBecca (Jun 5, 2002)

Aran wrote:

Quote:

I wanted to post to show that death by accidents (not including motor vehicle accidents) in the US has been declining steadily for kids in the past decades. . .
What can you take away from these data? Either:

(1) gee, kids are safer now so we should loosen up. OR
(2) wow, all that safety consciousness has really helped, let's keep it up!
Or (3) accidents are less likely to be fatal as surgical techniques and emergency response have improved. That's the reason U.S. troops in the current war are less likely to die than troops in earlier wars--it's not because fighting a war is safer than it used to be or because the military has become more safety conscious. I'm not certain how much of a factor it is in children's death rates, but it's certainly a possibility to consider when all you have is the number of deaths, not the number of accidents.

Interesting that motor vehicle accidents are not included in these stats. I've read elsewhere that vehicle accident deaths among children have increased...and it's not because cars are more dangerous, it's because children are spending more time in cars. Cars are my biggest safety worry for my kid--that he'll either be hurt as a passenger or hit as a pedestrian--and statistically, that's a lot more realistic than worrying about kidnapping.


----------



## ILoveMyBabyBird (Sep 2, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *EnviroBecca* 
Aran wrote:

Interesting that motor vehicle accidents are not included in these stats. I've read elsewhere that vehicle accident deaths among children have increased...and it's not because cars are more dangerous, it's because children are spending more time in cars. Cars are my biggest safety worry for my kid--that he'll either be hurt as a passenger or hit as a pedestrian--and statistically, that's a lot more realistic than worrying about kidnapping.


This is my mindset too. I was explaining to my sister that it is best to keep her infant dd rf as long as possible, and talking about the laws, etc. with my grandma present and she said something about back in the day they just sat the baby in a bassinett on the seat etc., implying that the carseat laws are overly causious etc, and i reminded her that back in the 50's kids just weren't in cars all that much and at the length and speed as most children today...For instance i would imagine children that sah with their parents rather than commute daily to a sitter are more likely to be in an accident as they are in the car more, etc. But also as you mentioned, i too am afraid of ds being struck by a car more than being abducted by a stranger. mainly because of his age that he doesn't have the judgement necessary to notice a car backing out,etc.

I live in a culdesac where the kids run wild in the streets, there are 5 homeschoolers on the block and the kids play outside a lot and so do the ps children. But these kids are a lot older than 3 yo ds, and i don't allow him to play outside in the street with the other kids unless i am in the front in eyesight. I try to encourage ds to play in the fenced backyard alone, but he won't stay out there unless dh or i am out there. I do consider myself a bit overprotective, we live right off a busy street where the speed limit is 40, but also for his age i don't think it is appropriate for me to allow him to 'play all day with the neighbor kids in the streets', but in a few years when he is older and more aware of his surroundings and fully potty trained, i will probably relax a bit and allow him to play in front w/o my constant watch


----------



## The4OfUs (May 23, 2005)

I think a lot of this has to do with where you live. IMO, if you live in either:

-an urban area where there are lots of kids around to play with, good public transportation, and lots of places to walk to for activities/fun

or

-a rural area where the kids can roam land in a pack with lots of area to explore and not a ton of other human traffic

free range sounds great. There's safety in numbers, lots to do and explore, etc.

BUT, if you live in a place that doesn't have a ton of kids available as a pack to play with, doesn't have a ton of land to roam OR good transport/close by places to walk, then maybe it's not so great, or not as easy to allow kids the free range.

I think it has a lot to do with where you live, and what your kids' temperament is. I'm all for giving kids responsibility and independent playtime, but for every kid it's different when they're ready to take more control of the reigns.


----------



## PreggieUBA2C (Mar 20, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *aran* 
CDC web site:

*Number of average annual deaths per 100,000 people due to accidents (excludes motor vehicle accidents)*

.......................*AGE RANGE
Year span.......< 1....1-4...5-14*
1960-1964........88.....31.....19
1965-1969........80.....33.....20
1970-1974........57.....31.....20
1975-1979........38.....27.....17
1980-1984........28.....23.....14
1985-1989........25.....20.....12
1990-1994........23.....17.....10
1995-1998........20.....14.....9

What can you take away from these data? Either:

(1) gee, kids are safer now so we should loosen up. OR
(2) wow, all that safety consciousness has really helped, let's keep it up!

A previous poster offered a third option, that death from injury is far less likely to occur now or in the most recently listed year of this example than in the earlier years. Also general safety, emergency response and knowledge of first aid/CPR/etc... trained neighbours has increased. I don't know how many people were certified for such things in the earliest mentioned years, but now almost everyone has to have it here, at least, to have a job. From counselors to cleaning crew leaders to babysitters and grocery store managers. This training is so widely available and inexpensive (though out of range for many still, I do understand) that most people who endure an injury anywhere near other people, will probably receive immediate care before even medics arrive. This is a pretty significant social change and one that would definitely impact the statistical outlook, imo.

I have another option, too. What if the number of deaths has decreased due to children doing less on their own and little else has actually affected the stat? They aren't doing anything because they are not allowed to, but if they were, the stat would remain somewhat similar? Maybe we are all doing a better collective job of preventing deaths in children in all but the most dire and unavoidable cases. The reason I wouldn't lump this in with option 2 is that maybe even though we've managed to decrease deaths, we've also decreased the quality of life, development, and freedom of our children. I'm not concluding that we have, just that it is a possibility.

I disagree that children who do not have the opportunities to make decisions about where they will go and what they will do will somehow suddenly have the understanding necessary to do so at a later time, or that this is innate.

It would seem that no matter when the free-ranging starts, they will have the same lessons to learn. It is easily argued that this isn't so imperative at very young ages, but instead increasingly as children mature, rather than, 'well, you're crawling, so off you go! See ya later!"

So, my 3 oldest children free-range, but we have chosen to live in remote places where the range itself is very safe, if not counting the wild animals, but we choose the peril of animal encounters over the common perils of city-life. So, it would seem that I may be of two minds about this, but really, I've just found a way to manipulate my life to accommodate my ideals in this way.

I could easily have died on several occasions as a free-ranging child, and had multiple abduction attempts that could have ended badly- two of which would have landed me in the hands of criminals who were later captured but not before they had killed several little girls. I avoided them by running, learning to walk facing traffic, yanking my arm from the grip of a man (on several occasions actually) and choosing to take routes that I felt were safer.

HOWEVER!!! This free-ranging didn't even seem to give me the requisite wisdom to avoid such things later as a teenager and still even later as a young woman. I'm not even sure that now, had I not purposed to regain my instinctual awareness (which had been badly tampered with by my parents during my childhood), that I would be any better off free-ranging as an adult.

Otoh, I also know people who were very protected as children, very limited in their 'ranges' and they do seem to have a better grasp on dangers than I did, but they also had parents who protected them out of genuine concern which was evident in every other aspect of their upbringing. I was free-range, but in EVERY way, which meant some unenforced/able and incoherent rules and otherwise no guidance.

My children free-range within a large and safe perimeter and I am a very attentive mum, so they have freedom limited to what they each can handle, and presently our eldest has been maturing so quickly that his range has been drastically increased in the last few weeks, and they have the guidance they want and need as well. I err on both sides all the time, and that's because I'm a free-range mama and making mistakes and learning from them is part of the territory, no matter how free.










I guess I had no idea that there was a movement or definition for FR until this thread, so I'll happily count myself in the same way I do with HSers, Free-birthers, libertarians and whomever else with whom it may be possible to relate something of value to us, of whatever sort, and not feel obliged to justify it.









Free range to me can exist within a limit, but to be _free_ and not just _range_, that limit should extend beyond the capacity of the child just enough to let him/her learn and grow without hindrance. I am confident that this looks different for almost everyone.


----------

