Free-range kids picked up AGAIN by police

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain why CPS didn't try to contact the parents immediately? And is there a particular neighbor who is suspected of instigating this? For the record, I used to live in the area and don't consider their choice particularly wise, but CPS must have known who these kids were the second time they picked them up and exactly what was going on. Hell, anyone who listens to NPR would have known what was going on and why these kids were not accompanied, right or wrong.

UMMM! Yea.. .these are the only kids that live in SS that CPS deals with. A whole department dedicated to free range kids.

I'm sure they're the only kids that live in SS who have their names which I'm sure they were able to give the officers. They were apparently held in a squad car for three hours without being able to go to the bathroom. Are you sure you know who he abusers are here?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Scenario: 6 yo falls off the monkey bars and breaks his arm. What will the 10 yo do?

Another scenario: Someone dresses up in a security officer uniform and says, "I'm the police. Come with me and I'll drive you home."
That never ends well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:[qu0ote=Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To be honest, I don't really know that I think it is a great idea for a 10 year old to supervise a 6 year old at a park on his/her own. Last summer, I had a 9 year old kid come up to me, a random stranger, and tell me that she thought her 5 year old brother had broken his leg, they lived 12 blocks away, and she didn't know what to do. I helped her deal with the situation (stayed with her brother while she went to get their mom and called 911). But I wouldn't say the 9 year old really seemed on top of the situation.

Sounds like she was on top of it--she knew she needed help and she asked a grown up for help.

And, there is certainly room for debate about which school-aged kids should be given which responsibilities at which ages. But that should be a debate for parents to have with each other about their own kids. It should not be resolved by the cops or CPS by picking up any kids found playing outside and detaining them for 5 hours without food and without letting their parents see them.

Except it was not the adult stranger's responsibility. It was the parents.


This.
Sorry, but IMO this style = lazy parenting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[qu0ote=Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To be honest, I don't really know that I think it is a great idea for a 10 year old to supervise a 6 year old at a park on his/her own. Last summer, I had a 9 year old kid come up to me, a random stranger, and tell me that she thought her 5 year old brother had broken his leg, they lived 12 blocks away, and she didn't know what to do. I helped her deal with the situation (stayed with her brother while she went to get their mom and called 911). But I wouldn't say the 9 year old really seemed on top of the situation.

Sounds like she was on top of it--she knew she needed help and she asked a grown up for help.

And, there is certainly room for debate about which school-aged kids should be given which responsibilities at which ages. But that should be a debate for parents to have with each other about their own kids. It should not be resolved by the cops or CPS by picking up any kids found playing outside and detaining them for 5 hours without food and without letting their parents see them.

Except it was not the adult stranger's responsibility. It was the parents.

This.
Sorry, but IMO this style = lazy parenting.

And you are certainly entitled to that opinion and to raise your own kids differently. We are not talking about that, we are talking about criminalizing what you are calling "lazy parenting." Would you also criminalize parents lazily letting their kids watch too much TV or eat too much junk food?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Scenario: 6 yo falls off the monkey bars and breaks his arm. What will the 10 yo do?

Another scenario: Someone dresses up in a security officer uniform and says, "I'm the police. Come with me and I'll drive you home."
That never ends well.

No, it didn't, did it? The police didn't drive them home.

[Anonymous]

But that should be a debate for parents to have with each other about their own kids. It should not be resolved by the cops or CPS by picking up any kids found playing outside and detaining them for 5 hours without food and without letting their parents see them.

But only if they are parents whose views you personally agree with are within the range of reasonableness, am I right? Or if a parent send their 6 year old to the park to supervise a 2 and 3 year old, is that just a debate for that parents "to have with each other about their own kids."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Setting aside this issue of whether it is right or wrong for the kids to be on their own in this park , I really don't know what the parents were expecting in this situation after what previously happened. They are well within their rights to advocate to have this law changed, but until it is, they've chosen to live in a place where this is the law, and by disregarding it after their kids were picked up by the police, they are the ones who have set the kids up for an unpleasant interaction with the police.

Perhaps they were expecting that the children would be able to walk to the park and back on a nice Sunday afternoon without getting picked up by the police.

...as they do probably every weekend.

[Anonymous]

I'm absolutely on the side of free-range parenting, but at this point, the Meitev are just trying to make a point using their children as pawns. They know the CPS is out to get them. And their children are traumatized and scared. As a parent, they should do what it takes to get the CPS out of their lives. I would get someone to supervise the children from 50 feet away. They can still criticize the stupidity of the CPS and the police all they want.

For those of us who were children in the 1970s - when there was much more street violence and crime - first grade readiness for a 6 year old included being able to walk 4-8 blocks from home to a store, playground, or friends house. Since its safer now, it makes complete sense for these parents to expect their children to be able to play 2 blocks from home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

But that should be a debate for parents to have with each other about their own kids. It should not be resolved by the cops or CPS by picking up any kids found playing outside and detaining them for 5 hours without food and without letting their parents see them.

But only if they are parents whose views you personally agree with are within the range of reasonableness, am I right? Or if a parent send their 6 year old to the park to supervise a 2 and 3 year old, is that just a debate for that parents "to have with each other about their own kids."

Obviously, yes there has to be a line somewhere. I was responding to the PP who called these parents "lazy" by pointing out that I dont think the line of legality should be drawn according to who is "lazy" but rather who is neglectful or abusive. If you think that letting a 6 year old and a 10 year old play alone outside is neglectful or abusive, you are free to advocate for laws that criminalize that choice (although I think you are crazy for doing so). If you think it's just lazy, you should limit yourself to bitching about it on DCUM and make different choices for your own kids.

I think the fact there are no laws prohibiting what these parents did reflects that our society thinks the choice should be left up to parents of school-aged children. This is consistent with the fact that until very recently parents were advised that a child about to start kindergarten should be able to walk 4-8 blocks alone, as this column about this case notes: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/free-range-kids-and-our-parenting-police-state/2015/04/13/42c30336-e1df-11e4-905f-cc896d379a32_story.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm absolutely on the side of free-range parenting, but at this point, the Meitev are just trying to make a point using their children as pawns. They know the CPS is out to get them. And their children are traumatized and scared. As a parent, they should do what it takes to get the CPS out of their lives. I would get someone to supervise the children from 50 feet away. They can still criticize the stupidity of the CPS and the police all they want.

For those of us who were children in the 1970s - when there was much more street violence and crime - first grade readiness for a 6 year old included being able to walk 4-8 blocks from home to a store, playground, or friends house. Since its safer now, it makes complete sense for these parents to expect their children to be able to play 2 blocks from home.

Really? I think that the Meitivs, like most of us, are trying to raise their children as they find reasonable and appropriate, but CPS is telling them that they're not allowed to.

[Anonymous]

Really? I think that the Meitivs, like most of us, are trying to raise their children as they find reasonable and appropriate, but CPS is telling them that they're not allowed to.

Well, ultimately, at the end of the day, that is CPS's call and the court's call. There is obviously a range of what people may view as appropriate or neglectful, and that is why we have chosen to have CPS and the courts be the authority that makes the call. I don't really agree with the call in this particular instance, but that really isn't here or there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The parents are traumatizing these kids by being rigid with this fight. They would rather take a stand, despite being told it is frowned upon by the police and subjecting their children to being detained by the police and CPS. Their children will probably grow up to be anti-government radicals or worse.

Actually I think that CPS and the police are traumatizing these kids.

+1. They should focus on the mother who left her child with CP in the woods to die rather than parents who let their kids walk to the neighborhood park! Really, crime is the best it has been for decades. You people are crazy!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The parents are traumatizing these kids by being rigid with this fight. They would rather take a stand, despite being told it is frowned upon by the police and subjecting their children to being detained by the police and CPS. Their children will probably grow up to be anti-government radicals or worse.

Actually I think that CPS and the police are traumatizing these kids.

Ok sure. Which wouldn't happen if their parents weren't stubbornly refusing to supervise them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The parents are traumatizing these kids by being rigid with this fight. They would rather take a stand, despite being told it is frowned upon by the police and subjecting their children to being detained by the police and CPS. Their children will probably grow up to be anti-government radicals or worse.

Actually I think that CPS and the police are traumatizing these kids.

Ok sure. Which wouldn't happen if their parents weren't stubbornly refusing to supervise them.

Why on earth does a 10 yo need constant supervision?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

No. I have no fear of CPS coming to my door. But, if I had a run in with CPS and it was a real fear of mine I would be more vigilant. The parents said, they were afraid something like this was going to happen. (Though I think they hoped something would happen because they are attention seekers.)

It's like your first DWI is a freebie... the 2nd time... not so much!

You should, though. Every rational parent should.

Don't be ridiculous. No they shouldn't. Has it ever happened to you? Or even anyone you know? Stop making stuff up.