Free-range kids picked up AGAIN by police

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What are you doing to help those kids?

What are you doing? Besides posting on DCUM.

A lot actually.

Good for you. Keep doing that, and don't waste your time worrying about what everybody else is doing.

I don't worry about what everyone else is doing. I also don't get all up in arms about the application of perfectly reasonable regulations to a situation that I don't know all the facts about. Maybe you should stop doing that and actually try helping someone for a change.

No, but you do get all up in arms about other people getting up in arms. Please focus on the issues you want to focus on and let me do the same.

I'm not stopping you from focusing on it, I have no more right to do that than you do to tell me what to focus on. I'm telling you that your focus is stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Well for one thing it's evidence that a kid wasn't being supervised by someone old enough to supervise her. That, if coupled with other evidence, might constitute neglect. That's why they investigate.

But that's what I don't get. Is it against the rules for a six-year-old and a ten-year-old to be out in public? Lots of people on this thread say that it is. But evidently CPS did not find that it is. But if it isn't against the rules for a six-year-old and a ten-year-old to be out in public, why did CPS investigate? Because it's kind of against the rules? Because it might be against the rules, if they find out more?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am sad to live in a county that does not allow kids to walk to and from a park without getting paranoid people calling 911 and getting pulled over by police. My siblings and I definitely were this age on our own playing outside daily. And not right in our front yard. As soon as the training wheels were off, we were free to ride to friends homes, the park, the baseball field, and the convenience store. The last 3 were at least a half mile away and the store was crossing a busy 2 lane road. We didn't have cell phones, we had watches and were told what time to be home. Made a lot of friends and had a lot of fun. Great childhood. Kids these days are so coddled and structured it is scary. And the fact that so many of you think that walking a mile back home from a park is abuse is even scarier.

Maybe that should be written into the law. As soon as a child can ride a bike without training wheels.

Your sadness is lost on elitist children, you should be sad for children who go days without food not hours.

Why can't we be sad for both children? Why can't we work to improve the lives of both children?

Because 1 set of children lives far exceed the measurement for excellent.

Not necessarily. Children who grow up with too much supervision have problems, as well:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/parenting/wp/2014/09/02/how-helicopter-parents-are-ruining-college-students/?tid=sm_fb

Bradley-Geist and Olson-Buchanan, both management professors, surveyed more than 450 undergraduate students who were asked to “rate their level of self-efficacy, the frequency of parental involvement, how involved parents were in their daily lives and their response to certain workplace scenarios.”

The study showed that those college students with “helicopter parents” had a hard time believing in their own ability to accomplish goals. They were more dependent on others, had poor coping strategies and didn’t have soft skills, like responsibility and conscientiousness throughout college, the authors found.

“I had a mom ask to sit in on a disciplinary meeting” when a student was failing, said Marla Vannucci, an associate professor at the Adler School of Professional Psychology in Chicago, who was that students’ academic adviser. Her team let the mom sit in, but in the end it doesn’t help. “It really breeds helplessness.”

Vannucci also had a college-aged client whose parents did her homework for her. The client’s mother explained that she didn’t want her daughter to struggle the same way she had. The daughter, however, “has grown up to be an adult who has anxiety attacks anytime someone asks her to do something challenging” because she never learned how to handle anything on her own.

These may be extreme cases, but parental over-involvement has been bleeding into college culture for some time now. “I think they need to know that they are actually diminishing their child’s ability to understand how to navigate the world by trying to do it for them,” Gibralter said.

Are yes, the old truism that if you don't let your kid walk a mile from home alone until they are eight you are a helicopter parent. Makes perfect sense.

Not the PP but yes I think if you don't let kids go off on their own with friends and siblings, you are indeed a helicopter parent. There are just so many of you out there these days that you don't even see it. As a matter of fact, a few decades ago, if you left your kid inside all day or followed them around everywhere they went, the other kids would have been so freaked out, another mom would have called CPS on your for being a nut job. Could you imagine if all our moms followed us around on foot, bike, etc... Wow!

Oh well, because I didn't let my kid do that stuff until she was eight alone, I guess she's damaged for life. Strangely she seems to be super independent but who knows?

Do you let your 8yr old go to the park alone, ride her bike all around the neighborhood, stay out until dinner time and you aren't 100% sure the location in the neighborhood she may be in? Or is she only allowed a few houses away, must make contact with you every 30min, carry a cell-phone, etc... There is a difference in what helicopters say is freedom and what truly is.

She has to stay with in the neighborhood, no cell phone, I generally know where she is, or I know roughly where she is and could probably find her within about 15 minutes of walking around. That's exactly the same standards that my parents applied to me in the late 70s and early 80s. I turned out super capable and independent. not a problem

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the parents who are hell bent on sending their kids to the park alone before they are old enough are the same parents who drank wine throughout their pregnancies, dragged their babies to bars, and shun after school activities (which involve giving up your me time to schlep kids to/from practice and games)?

And I wonder why these kids aren't playing with kids in their neighborhood? And if there aren't any kids on their street, then why not pick up the phone and invite a kid over to play?

As the mother of four, I find it supremely odd that a ten year old boy would have any interest in playing with his six year old sister...most ten year olds have zero interest in playing with much younger kids. My guess is that the parents use him as a babysitter, and that's a crummy thing to do IMHO.

Nobody is hell bent on sending their kids to the park alone before they are old enough. However, some people would like their children to be able to go to the park alone before you are old enough.

Also, different kids are different. Your kids are not the archetype for all kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

She has to stay with in the neighborhood, no cell phone, I generally know where she is, or I know roughly where she is and could probably find her within about 15 minutes of walking around. That's exactly the same standards that my parents applied to me in the late 70s and early 80s. I turned out super capable and independent. not a problem

How do you define neighborhood? How big is the neighborhood?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well for one thing it's evidence that a kid wasn't being supervised by someone old enough to supervise her. That, if coupled with other evidence, might constitute neglect. That's why they investigate.

But that's what I don't get. Is it against the rules for a six-year-old and a ten-year-old to be out in public? Lots of people on this thread say that it is. But evidently CPS did not find that it is. But if it isn't against the rules for a six-year-old and a ten-year-old to be out in public, why did CPS investigate? Because it's kind of against the rules? Because it might be against the rules, if they find out more?

It's some evidence of neglect, not conclusive evidence. That's why there's an investigation. They have to look at the totality of the circumstances and thinking about child issues. Which, if you think about it, makes a lot of sense. Let's say they found the kids alone and the kids are too young to be out alone. So they go check out the house. The parents say oh they knew exactly where they were, this is the first time we've done that, sure we'll make sure that little Bobby isnt out supervising his little sister until he turns 11 next week. That's one thing. It's quite another if when they go to the house they find the dad high and he had no idea where the kids were. And the kids hadn't been to school for 10 days in the last month. Then the investigation continues. It's always a totality of the circumstances. In this particular case, I do not know what those circumstances are, and neither do you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

She has to stay with in the neighborhood, no cell phone, I generally know where she is, or I know roughly where she is and could probably find her within about 15 minutes of walking around. That's exactly the same standards that my parents applied to me in the late 70s and early 80s. I turned out super capable and independent. not a problem

How do you define neighborhood? How big is the neighborhood?

Maybe 7 blocks by 4 blocks. But that's just an estimate. I wouldn't let her go across the big roads on either end of the neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the parents who are hell bent on sending their kids to the park alone before they are old enough are the same parents who drank wine throughout their pregnancies, dragged their babies to bars, and shun after school activities (which involve giving up your me time to schlep kids to/from practice and games)?

And I wonder why these kids aren't playing with kids in their neighborhood? And if there aren't any kids on their street, then why not pick up the phone and invite a kid over to play?

As the mother of four, I find it supremely odd that a ten year old boy would have any interest in playing with his six year old sister...most ten year olds have zero interest in playing with much younger kids. My guess is that the parents use him as a babysitter, and that's a crummy thing to do IMHO.

I wonder if the parents hell bent on making it a law to not allow kids to go to parks are the same one who had a birthing plan, have huge containers of hand sanitizer in their house, who pack 2 diapers bags as a just in case we get stranded, who follow their kids around at the park and tell them where to go, what to play, who to play with, and intervene any disputes. Who sit next to their kids when they do their homework, who pick out their clothes everyday, who put them in an organized activity every day of the week and gladly spend 4 hours commuting each child to and from their future Div 1 sports. Who plans playdates and structures them with planned crafts and games. Who never drop off at a birthday party but always stay, who gives their kid a cell phone at the age of 8 to make sure they can check in all the time. Who says there is no time for their kids to chores, that it isn't fair for them to have responsibilities because they work so hard.

And you wonder why kids aren't playing in their neighborhood? It is because they are in 3-5 activities and then on computer screens for their downtime.

And maybe a 10yr old doesn't want to play with his sister all the time (and why you just assume he does?) but it is good parenting to teach your kids to be good siblings to each other, to have responsibilities, and to not be a selfish whiny kid that always gets their way because Mommy will do it all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the parents who are hell bent on sending their kids to the park alone before they are old enough are the same parents who drank wine throughout their pregnancies, dragged their babies to bars, and shun after school activities (which involve giving up your me time to schlep kids to/from practice and games)?

And I wonder why these kids aren't playing with kids in their neighborhood? And if there aren't any kids on their street, then why not pick up the phone and invite a kid over to play?

As the mother of four, I find it supremely odd that a ten year old boy would have any interest in playing with his six year old sister...most ten year olds have zero interest in playing with much younger kids. My guess is that the parents use him as a babysitter, and that's a crummy thing to do IMHO.

I wonder if the parents hell bent on making it a law to not allow kids to go to parks are the same one who had a birthing plan, have huge containers of hand sanitizer in their house, who pack 2 diapers bags as a just in case we get stranded, who follow their kids around at the park and tell them where to go, what to play, who to play with, and intervene any disputes. Who sit next to their kids when they do their homework, who pick out their clothes everyday, who put them in an organized activity every day of the week and gladly spend 4 hours commuting each child to and from their future Div 1 sports. Who plans playdates and structures them with planned crafts and games. Who never drop off at a birthday party but always stay, who gives their kid a cell phone at the age of 8 to make sure they can check in all the time. Who says there is no time for their kids to chores, that it isn't fair for them to have responsibilities because they work so hard.

And you wonder why kids aren't playing in their neighborhood? It is because they are in 3-5 activities and then on computer screens for their downtime.

And maybe a 10yr old doesn't want to play with his sister all the time (and why you just assume he does?) but it is good parenting to teach your kids to be good siblings to each other, to have responsibilities, and to not be a selfish whiny kid that always gets their way because Mommy will do it all.

It already is the law, and I support it, and no I don't do any of those things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the parents who are hell bent on sending their kids to the park alone before they are old enough are the same parents who drank wine throughout their pregnancies, dragged their babies to bars, and shun after school activities (which involve giving up your me time to schlep kids to/from practice and games)?

And I wonder why these kids aren't playing with kids in their neighborhood? And if there aren't any kids on their street, then why not pick up the phone and invite a kid over to play?

As the mother of four, I find it supremely odd that a ten year old boy would have any interest in playing with his six year old sister...most ten year olds have zero interest in playing with much younger kids. My guess is that the parents use him as a babysitter, and that's a crummy thing to do IMHO.

I wonder if the parents hell bent on making it a law to not allow kids to go to parks are the same one who had a birthing plan, have huge containers of hand sanitizer in their house, who pack 2 diapers bags as a just in case we get stranded, who follow their kids around at the park and tell them where to go, what to play, who to play with, and intervene any disputes. Who sit next to their kids when they do their homework, who pick out their clothes everyday, who put them in an organized activity every day of the week and gladly spend 4 hours commuting each child to and from their future Div 1 sports. Who plans playdates and structures them with planned crafts and games. Who never drop off at a birthday party but always stay, who gives their kid a cell phone at the age of 8 to make sure they can check in all the time. Who says there is no time for their kids to chores, that it isn't fair for them to have responsibilities because they work so hard.

And you wonder why kids aren't playing in their neighborhood? It is because they are in 3-5 activities and then on computer screens for their downtime.

And maybe a 10yr old doesn't want to play with his sister all the time (and why you just assume he does?) but it is good parenting to teach your kids to be good siblings to each other, to have responsibilities, and to not be a selfish whiny kid that always gets their way because Mommy will do it all.

This.is.awesome! 100% true. But every coddling mom will say they never do these things. Watch!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the parents who are hell bent on sending their kids to the park alone before they are old enough are the same parents who drank wine throughout their pregnancies, dragged their babies to bars, and shun after school activities (which involve giving up your me time to schlep kids to/from practice and games)?

And I wonder why these kids aren't playing with kids in their neighborhood? And if there aren't any kids on their street, then why not pick up the phone and invite a kid over to play?

As the mother of four, I find it supremely odd that a ten year old boy would have any interest in playing with his six year old sister...most ten year olds have zero interest in playing with much younger kids. My guess is that the parents use him as a babysitter, and that's a crummy thing to do IMHO.

I wonder if the parents hell bent on making it a law to not allow kids to go to parks are the same one who had a birthing plan, have huge containers of hand sanitizer in their house, who pack 2 diapers bags as a just in case we get stranded, who follow their kids around at the park and tell them where to go, what to play, who to play with, and intervene any disputes. Who sit next to their kids when they do their homework, who pick out their clothes everyday, who put them in an organized activity every day of the week and gladly spend 4 hours commuting each child to and from their future Div 1 sports. Who plans playdates and structures them with planned crafts and games. Who never drop off at a birthday party but always stay, who gives their kid a cell phone at the age of 8 to make sure they can check in all the time. Who says there is no time for their kids to chores, that it isn't fair for them to have responsibilities because they work so hard.

And you wonder why kids aren't playing in their neighborhood? It is because they are in 3-5 activities and then on computer screens for their downtime.

And maybe a 10yr old doesn't want to play with his sister all the time (and why you just assume he does?) but it is good parenting to teach your kids to be good siblings to each other, to have responsibilities, and to not be a selfish whiny kid that always gets their way because Mommy will do it all.

This.is.awesome! 100% true. But every coddling mom will say they never do these things. Watch!

Ok. So if what you say about us is wrong and we tell you it's wrong, we must be lying. It's impossible that you're actually wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

It's some evidence of neglect, not conclusive evidence. That's why there's an investigation. They have to look at the totality of the circumstances and thinking about child issues. Which, if you think about it, makes a lot of sense. Let's say they found the kids alone and the kids are too young to be out alone. So they go check out the house. The parents say oh they knew exactly where they were, this is the first time we've done that, sure we'll make sure that little Bobby isnt out supervising his little sister until he turns 11 next week. That's one thing. It's quite another if when they go to the house they find the dad high and he had no idea where the kids were. And the kids hadn't been to school for 10 days in the last month. Then the investigation continues. It's always a totality of the circumstances. In this particular case, I do not know what those circumstances are, and neither do you.

So it's not neglect as long as the parents promise to never do it again?

Well, there's the problem. Why should they promise to never do it again, if it's

1. not illegal, and
2. not neglectful?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
You just don't get it. And yes, we do need some regulations as to what can and cannot with their kids -- we do. People do not mind that their are car seat laws or leaving kids alone in a car, etc. . I let my kids do stuff that technically may be against the regs and if I got called out on it -- I'd get over it and comply. Why? Because I know that I am responsible, but their are a lot of other people that are not and it is not going to kill me or my kids to not walk to Starbucks by themselves. Folks get pissed because things are no longer old-school and neighbors are not friendly and looking out, but as soon as someone does -- there is hell to pay. These parents are loud mouth grand standers who are more interested in a cause then the possibility of losing their kids. Horrible execution on their part, so much else they could have done to change the regs if they disagree. Just another example of the privileged, all about me, entitlement epidemic in this area.

Bravo, very well stated!!! I totally agree that these parents have a huge sense of entitlement because they feel they are above the law. Sorry folks, no one is above the law. As others have said, work to change laws you don't agree with. These parents just continue to flaunt their disagreement with the law, thereby putting their own kids at risk in the meantime.

Sometimes going against a law you feel is unjust requires people willing to do the right thing. Personally, that is not the way I am wired to operate. But look at recent history -- whether you agree with the causes or not: gay marriage and pot laws (though still against federal law). In the 1930s people harboring Jews were breaking the law. Do you think that lawmakers would seriously take up the cause of children walking to the neighborhood playground unless there was public fervor about a case or several across the country??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Are yes, the old truism that if you don't let your kid walk a mile from home alone until they are eight you are a helicopter parent. Makes perfect sense.

That is not an old truism. For one thing, it's not a truism. More importantly, it's not old. Before 40 years ago, if you had said that children under 8 should not be allowed to walk a mile home by themselves, most people would have thought you were nuts.

"Free-range parenting", the name, is new-fangled. But doing what free-range parents do is not new-fangled. It's what parents have been doing for hundreds and thousands of years. Even Tony Kornheiser recognizes this, and he's an idiot.

Yes!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the parents who are hell bent on sending their kids to the park alone before they are old enough are the same parents who drank wine throughout their pregnancies, dragged their babies to bars, and shun after school activities (which involve giving up your me time to schlep kids to/from practice and games)?

And I wonder why these kids aren't playing with kids in their neighborhood? And if there aren't any kids on their street, then why not pick up the phone and invite a kid over to play?

As the mother of four, I find it supremely odd that a ten year old boy would have any interest in playing with his six year old sister...most ten year olds have zero interest in playing with much younger kids. My guess is that the parents use him as a babysitter, and that's a crummy thing to do IMHO.

I wonder if the parents hell bent on making it a law to not allow kids to go to parks are the same one who had a birthing plan, have huge containers of hand sanitizer in their house, who pack 2 diapers bags as a just in case we get stranded, who follow their kids around at the park and tell them where to go, what to play, who to play with, and intervene any disputes. Who sit next to their kids when they do their homework, who pick out their clothes everyday, who put them in an organized activity every day of the week and gladly spend 4 hours commuting each child to and from their future Div 1 sports. Who plans playdates and structures them with planned crafts and games. Who never drop off at a birthday party but always stay, who gives their kid a cell phone at the age of 8 to make sure they can check in all the time. Who says there is no time for their kids to chores, that it isn't fair for them to have responsibilities because they work so hard.

And you wonder why kids aren't playing in their neighborhood? It is because they are in 3-5 activities and then on computer screens for their downtime.

And maybe a 10yr old doesn't want to play with his sister all the time (and why you just assume he does?) but it is good parenting to teach your kids to be good siblings to each other, to have responsibilities, and to not be a selfish whiny kid that always gets their way because Mommy will do it all.

This.is.awesome! 100% true. But every coddling mom will say they never do these things. Watch!

Why do you people swing to the extreme with every rebuttal???

I'm the mom of four. I am a slacker mom. No birth plan. Heck, I didn't even breast feed. My kids walk to the bus stop, ride bikes to 7-11, etc. But if CPS put me through the ringer for anything, I'm smart enough to not repeat the behavior in order to prevent my kids from being picked up by the police and having CPS on my ass again...because I'm not a moron, and I recognize that I'm not above the law.