Free-range parents cited but not charged

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So why were all the 70's kids allowed to roll around unrestrained and surrounded by glass in the back of the station wagon when it would be considered shockingly irresponsible now? Were cars safer back then? Of course not. Parents were a lot more reckless then, that's why. Society generally progresses over time, and personally I think having higher safety standards for our children is a sign of advancement.

Since the 1970s, the number of child deaths in car wrecks has fallen significantly, due to carseats, seatbelts, and safer cars.

Since the 1970s, the number of child abductions by strangers has...well, actually it hasn't changed. But the lives of children sure are a lot more restricted.

I'm not sure that the lives of children are more restricted simply due to the mistaken belief that they are more likely to be abducted now, although that certainly plays a part. I suspect a lot of parents just feel less willingly to let their children be in risky situations that parents in the past brushed off. When I was a kid I was allowed to ride my bike along busy streets that I would never let my kids bike along now. I know I will be attacked for this, but I think parents in the past were too lax, and today's parents have just wised up.

And kids back then had common sense and street smarts. Also critical thinking skills. Have you ever heard how learning from doing and not hearing works so much better?

Kids today are puppets being dragged from one structured event to another. Always being told what to do, what not to do. Which equals kids with no independence, street smarts, common sense, imagination, or good analytical and critical thinkings skills. If given a standardized test they will rock it. Have them lost without a cell phone and they would be clueless. My 16yr old has friends that can still not take the metro with friends to museums downtown. My 14yr old has friends that can not go to the mall or even be anywhere in public without a parent, including a movie. Parents that have GPS trackers on their phones. I still have parents emailing asking for playdates for my 12 and 14yr old and they all have their own phones. Annoying!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:42 and no this was not normal for everyone.

NP, I am 41 and walked home by myself. I don't ever remember a parent coming to a bus stop ever besides the first day of school. I also played outside all day long. We lived in a cup-de-sac so most of the kids came up playing our way but they were from at least a block or more around and it was kids of all ages. And there was NEVER a parent outside. The moms were all inside prepping for dinner and watching their soap operas. We also never had homework until about 3rd grade but even then, it was done at night. There was serious playing to be done after school

In the summer time, we ate dinner so fast so we could get back outside. Once you were allowed to stay outside after dark there were games of jailbreak, kick the can, etc.. We wore a watch and were told when we would need to be home. Great life and sad my kids don't have the same kind of neighborhood. If there are 3 kids outside playing on a weekend, that is considered active.

I am a girl scout leader and every time I bring out an "old-school" game the kids love it. If we could only keep them away from the electronics and kick them outside all at once.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:42 and no this was not normal for everyone.

That's because you are 42. Ask somebody who is 52.

54 and this was the norm in my Boston 'burb. I have a clear memory of my mother walking to/from kindergarten with me the week before school started to "practice." She walked me to school on the first day, and after that I walked by myself (at 5yo). School was about eight blocks away.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So why were all the 70's kids allowed to roll around unrestrained and surrounded by glass in the back of the station wagon when it would be considered shockingly irresponsible now? Were cars safer back then? Of course not. Parents were a lot more reckless then, that's why. Society generally progresses over time, and personally I think having higher safety standards for our children is a sign of advancement.

Since the 1970s, the number of child deaths in car wrecks has fallen significantly, due to carseats, seatbelts, and safer cars.

Since the 1970s, the number of child abductions by strangers has...well, actually it hasn't changed. But the lives of children sure are a lot more restricted.

I'm not sure that the lives of children are more restricted simply due to the mistaken belief that they are more likely to be abducted now, although that certainly plays a part. I suspect a lot of parents just feel less willingly to let their children be in risky situations that parents in the past brushed off. When I was a kid I was allowed to ride my bike along busy streets that I would never let my kids bike along now. I know I will be attacked for this, but I think parents in the past were too lax, and today's parents have just wised up.

And kids back then had common sense and street smarts. Also critical thinking skills. Have you ever heard how learning from doing and not hearing works so much better?

Kids today are puppets being dragged from one structured event to another. Always being told what to do, what not to do. Which equals kids with no independence, street smarts, common sense, imagination, or good analytical and critical thinkings skills. If given a standardized test they will rock it. Have them lost without a cell phone and they would be clueless. My 16yr old has friends that can still not take the metro with friends to museums downtown. My 14yr old has friends that can not go to the mall or even be anywhere in public without a parent, including a movie. Parents that have GPS trackers on their phones. I still have parents emailing asking for playdates for my 12 and 14yr old and they all have their own phones. Annoying!

Yeah and plenty of these street smart kids died too. Just like plenty of them died in car accidents from being allowed to roll around in the back of the station wagon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:42 and no this was not normal for everyone.

NP, I am 41 and walked home by myself. I don't ever remember a parent coming to a bus stop ever besides the first day of school. I also played outside all day long. We lived in a cup-de-sac so most of the kids came up playing our way but they were from at least a block or more around and it was kids of all ages. And there was NEVER a parent outside. The moms were all inside prepping for dinner and watching their soap operas. We also never had homework until about 3rd grade but even then, it was done at night. There was serious playing to be done after school

In the summer time, we ate dinner so fast so we could get back outside. Once you were allowed to stay outside after dark there were games of jailbreak, kick the can, etc.. We wore a watch and were told when we would need to be home. Great life and sad my kids don't have the same kind of neighborhood. If there are 3 kids outside playing on a weekend, that is considered active.

I am a girl scout leader and every time I bring out an "old-school" game the kids love it. If we could only keep them away from the electronics and kick them outside all at once.

The 42 year old here. Yes, this sounds like my childhood too. What I was referring to as not the norm were some of the more extreme examples of children Barely past toddlerhood being able to roam around unaccompanied wherever they want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:42 and no this was not normal for everyone.

NP, I am 41 and walked home by myself. I don't ever remember a parent coming to a bus stop ever besides the first day of school. I also played outside all day long. We lived in a cup-de-sac so most of the kids came up playing our way but they were from at least a block or more around and it was kids of all ages. And there was NEVER a parent outside. The moms were all inside prepping for dinner and watching their soap operas. We also never had homework until about 3rd grade but even then, it was done at night. There was serious playing to be done after school

In the summer time, we ate dinner so fast so we could get back outside. Once you were allowed to stay outside after dark there were games of jailbreak, kick the can, etc.. We wore a watch and were told when we would need to be home. Great life and sad my kids don't have the same kind of neighborhood. If there are 3 kids outside playing on a weekend, that is considered active.

I am a girl scout leader and every time I bring out an "old-school" game the kids love it. If we could only keep them away from the electronics and kick them outside all at once.

The 42 year old here. Yes, this sounds like my childhood too. What I was referring to as not the norm were some of the more extreme examples of children Barely past toddlerhood being able to roam around unaccompanied wherever they want.

A 6yo is not "barely past toddlerhood."

[Anonymous]

Who's talking about a 6 year old? Have you read some of these posts?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The law was involved the minute someone called in a complaint (and then when it happened again, as in the case of this family.)

OP and PPs, you don't have to agree with the agency decision. But based on the law and based upon the varying opinions of other parents, the agency decision was not unreasonable. There is legal justification and there is evidence sufficient to convince at least some people (including me, as the parent of a 6yo and 10yo) that there were legitimate safety issues involved and legitimate concerns about parental responsibility. The ruling is a symbolic one in any case.

[Anonymous]

I am genuinely curious where people who say that they were crossing streets and leaving the boundaries of their block alone at age 6 grew up.

I'm 42 and grew up in Chevy Chase, halfway between Somerset ES and Norwood Park for those familiar with that area. I walked to kindergarten with my older siblings but walked home alone since it was half-day. And I was 4 when I went to kindergarten! And I walked home and had lunch with my mom once a week, then walked back to school. All through the early elementary years - I can remember they were K-3 because I went to a different school starting in 4th - we could walk alone to each other's houses, to the school playground, to the park etc. as long as we were home at 5. I met my best friend in the neighborhood when she rang our doorbell - without her mom - looking for kids her age to play with as her family had just moved into the neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The law was involved the minute someone called in a complaint (and then when it happened again, as in the case of this family.)

OP and PPs, you don't have to agree with the agency decision. But based on the law and based upon the varying opinions of other parents, the agency decision was not unreasonable. There is legal justification and there is evidence sufficient to convince at least some people (including me, as the parent of a 6yo and 10yo) that there were legitimate safety issues involved and legitimate concerns about parental responsibility. The ruling is a symbolic one in any case.

What law?

And I doubt that the family concerned considers the finding "symbolic".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The 42 year old here. Yes, this sounds like my childhood too. What I was referring to as not the norm were some of the more extreme examples of children Barely past toddlerhood being able to roam around unaccompanied wherever they want.

Who posted stories about three-year-olds being able to roam around unaccompanied wherever they want? I don't remember reading any of those stories on this thread.

[Anonymous]

NP here. We live in a close in suburb. There are kids on the street all the time. What I don't understand are the families who let their kids, who don't know basic "look both ways before you cross", run in front of cars constantly. It is scary.

I don't think we should lock kids up until they are 18, but the kids NEED to know very basic street safety, at the very least. The older siblings are NOT watching them at all, I can tell you that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP here. We live in a close in suburb. There are kids on the street all the time. What I don't understand are the families who let their kids, who don't know basic "look both ways before you cross", run in front of cars constantly. It is scary.

I don't think we should lock kids up until they are 18, but the kids NEED to know very basic street safety, at the very least. The older siblings are NOT watching them at all, I can tell you that.

[/quote





Shame on you! How else are they supposed to develop independence and "street smarts"?

[Anonymous]

Just curious. How many of these people who were allowed to walk a mile ALONE at the age of 5 would let their kids do the same?

[Anonymous]

It isn't just about snatching snatching:

- child could get physically hurt

- someone older could expose himself (was happening in our neighborhood that a 20something year old male was pulling his pants down exposing himself to kids)

- someone could find out information about your home (do parents work during the day?...police think this is how my friend's house was robbed - after the arrest was made their kid said he talked to "that" guy once)