Free-range parents cited but not charged

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Were the parents too busy to supervise their kids? I am all for independence but a 10 yr shouldn't be watching a 6yo.

No, they put a lot of thought into teaching their children early independence. It's part of their "Free Range Kids" philosophy (of the eponymous book). I don't agree with it, but feel that if their kids have been trained to cross roads, react appropriately to strangers, etc, then they are in fact safer than if it was a true case of neglect and just dumping the kids spontaneously.

I wish this expression had never been coined. The term "free range parenting" connotes that other, non-free-range parenting (helicopter parenting? hands-on parenting?) is the standard, and that "free-range" is a deviation from that. That it is strange or weird or somehow deviant.

In my 20910/downtown Silver Spring world, the choice these parents made (I won't use the above term) constitutes plain-vanilla "parenting." Full-stop. My own children have walked Georgia Avenue many times, unsupervised. They didn't do so at those ages, but it doesn't shock me to think that children those age would - I routinely sent my boys to the barber shop on Georgia with money for a haircut, unsupervised and with money in their pockets. At 11, my son would ride his bike to the comics shop on Fenton (not far from Georgia) to spend his allowance. No need for us to go along.

I myself did exactly what these children do as a child. At 6, I was riding my bike to the library to check out books. At 10, I was riding a bus to dance lessons with my best friend, and buying an ice cream on our way home.

These sorts of small freedoms lay the groundwork for confidence and competence. A child who is unaccustomed to navigating the world becomes a teen and later adult who has troubles with this as well. A child who never has to develop resourcefulness becomes an adult who has trouble solving problems. If we as parents do not give our children the opportunities they need to develop these skills, then no one else will.

And being able to walk ga. ave unsupervised is the only way to do it? allowing our 10 yr old to supervise your 6 yr old is the only way to do it?
gimme a break, if you and other parents do not have the imagination and creativity to be able to foster independence and self-confidence outside of being allowed to do those 2 things, then i feel sorry for your kids. I am sure there are things that I do as a parent that my dh and i judge as being fit for our kids according to our values, parenting and the kids' maturity. Maybe we'll allow them to watch certain Rated R movies at home, something with a mature theme that we fill is ok and about which we hold discussions. I'm certainly not going to get into a fight with the Regal Cinema downtown Silver Spring because they won't let me bring my 8 yr old in there. It's not worth the hassle. To me the more important lesson is to let my kids know, that we can exercise certain judgements that may be different than others in certain situations, but in doing so we need to weigh the consequences and decide if they are worth the fight/aggravation. I would have no problem telling my kids that 'hey, we trust that you can handle walking to the library on your own, however, the law has certain restrictuions and we want to respect this law. We can find other things that you are allowed to do so that you can show how grown-up/mature you are'. When we go to grandma's house, the laws are different and you can ride your scooter to the library, no problem.
For the life of me, I just cannot see how this is a hill worth dying on. It screams big ass EGOS to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: When people are more concerned about their own agenda than the consequences (whether or not they agree) -- then something is very wrong. If someone saw my kids walking along a major road alone and called the cops, who am I to mad at them? At least I know that if something really was wrong than there was a chance that someone saw something and called for help. And I may disagree with the law, but I'm going to follow it rather than get hung up with CPS for months. That is dumb as s***! Folks are way more attached to their so-called rights than doing what is right. Philosophy does not trump reality.

There was no law that was broken

[Anonymous]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-31828764

This is why I am hesitant to free range parent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
And being able to walk ga. ave unsupervised is the only way to do it? allowing our 10 yr old to supervise your 6 yr old is the only way to do it?
gimme a break, if you and other parents do not have the imagination and creativity to be able to foster independence and self-confidence outside of being allowed to do those 2 things, then i feel sorry for your kids. I am sure there are things that I do as a parent that my dh and i judge as being fit for our kids according to our values, parenting and the kids' maturity. Maybe we'll allow them to watch certain Rated R movies at home, something with a mature theme that we fill is ok and about which we hold discussions. I'm certainly not going to get into a fight with the Regal Cinema downtown Silver Spring because they won't let me bring my 8 yr old in there. It's not worth the hassle. To me the more important lesson is to let my kids know, that we can exercise certain judgements that may be different than others in certain situations, but in doing so we need to weigh the consequences and decide if they are worth the fight/aggravation. I would have no problem telling my kids that 'hey, we trust that you can handle walking to the library on your own, however, the law has certain restrictuions and we want to respect this law. We can find other things that you are allowed to do so that you can show how grown-up/mature you are'. When we go to grandma's house, the laws are different and you can ride your scooter to the library, no problem.
For the life of me, I just cannot see how this is a hill worth dying on. It screams big ass EGOS to me.

Being able to walk Georgia Avenue unsupervised is not the hill. The hill is being able to decide when and where their children are allowed to go on their own, without getting hauled into the CPS bureaucracy. I think that's a worthwhile hill, even though I personally would make different choices.

What's more, they haven't broken any laws.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would worry about visibility of kids who aren't very tall. And generally wreckless drivers. Can someone confirm if they were really crossing Georgia and Colesville or somewhere else along Ga?

I was extremely independent at age 10 and rode my bike all over the college town where I grew up, my parents didn't know where I was after school half the time because there were no safety concerns. But it was small town living, it wasn't a congested megalopolis. If my friend were allowing her 6 and 10 yo kids to cross at Ga and Colesville I'd most likely say something to her and if she were strong headed about it, I'd probably worry for the kids. Sometimes you have to be able to read drivers--their intentions, what they are likely to do, based on where they are looking, whether they are slowing down or speeding up, etc., and that ability can take a while to develop.

Are you serious? I guess I should say something to all my friend's who don't let their kids walk anywhere alone even at age 12. I worry about their kids. They are allowed to sit home on the internet all day but can not navigate a crosswalk yet. So mommy-dependent. I worry and probably should speak up.

The whole point of the article is there is no law outside of a dwelling and it SHOULD be to the discretion of the parents and not the parent's friends, not a stranger, not a police officer. Once they know the kids walk the route and are comfortable walking home, all should be left a lone. Instead the kids were throated to be taken away. Give me a break. We would all be parentless if this were the case 30yrs ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As noted above, the way the parents have revelled in the media attention without any evident concern for how all that attention might affect the kids demonstrates they are unfit parents.

Lots of parents do things I wouldn't do. That doesn't make them unfit parents.

These parents are sticking to their principles, and there is a lot to admire about that.

No really it is not

You are right, slaves and women should not have stuck to their principles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-31828764

This is why I am hesitant to free range parent.

This is exactly WHY I think there should be free-range parenting. The older siblings had enough street smarts and common sense to thwart the attempt. There are teenagers in this area that are nervous about being alone. Nervous about crossing a street, biking into another town, and have zero critical thinking and navigating skills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As noted above, the way the parents have revelled in the media attention without any evident concern for how all that attention might affect the kids demonstrates they are unfit parents.

Lots of parents do things I wouldn't do. That doesn't make them unfit parents.

These parents are sticking to their principles, and there is a lot to admire about that.

Sticking to your principles is saying, 'hey we think this law is antiquated and ineffective, I'm going to lobby to change the law. In the meantime, I'm going to obey the law as it is, and find another way to foster independence and maturity in my kids. The emotional and finacial cost of legal wrangling and public/media exposure is not worth it to my family if no one is being harmed or abused." These people are not fighting to give their dying children to receive experimental treatment or medicine, they are not fighting to overturn an illegal adoption. They are not fighting to establish Amber Alerts. These people are making a big deal out of their kids not being able to walk down GA by themselves. There is more than one way to skin a cat, but these folks are using very little judgement.

Exactly, and there is more than one way to stick to your principles.

As it happens, I think that they've been extremely effective in publicizing the issue.

More than one way to see it I guess, to me they have been effective in publicizing themselves, not the issue. Especially, since all I think when I see them is , 'what idiots', not 'hmm maybe they have a solid idea and the laws may need changing, tweaking, re-examining'.

And IMO all this publicity is just telling the perverts out there about vulnerable, unsupervised kids. It seems very stupid to me. Oh yeah and exactly where to find these children.

H E L I C O P T E R

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As noted above, the way the parents have revelled in the media attention without any evident concern for how all that attention might affect the kids demonstrates they are unfit parents.

Lots of parents do things I wouldn't do. That doesn't make them unfit parents.

These parents are sticking to their principles, and there is a lot to admire about that.

No really it is not

You are right, slaves and women should not have stuck to their principles.

You are really comparing this to slavery and women's rights -- wow!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-31828764

This is why I am hesitant to free range parent.

This is exactly WHY I think there should be free-range parenting. The older siblings had enough street smarts and common sense to thwart the attempt. There are teenagers in this area that are nervous about being alone. Nervous about crossing a street, biking into another town, and have zero critical thinking and navigating skills.

They had a babysitter who LEFT THEM ALONE!!!!!!!!!
Plus, there is a lot of middle ground between so-called free-range parenting and being a totally incompetent kid!!!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-31828764

This is why I am hesitant to free range parent.

This is exactly WHY I think there should be free-range parenting. The older siblings had enough street smarts and common sense to thwart the attempt. There are teenagers in this area that are nervous about being alone. Nervous about crossing a street, biking into another town, and have zero critical thinking and navigating skills.

They had a babysitter who LEFT THEM ALONE!!!!!!!!!
Plus, there is a lot of middle ground between so-called free-range parenting and being a totally incompetent kid!!!!!

In this area there is not. Very coddled kids with parents that do everything for them. Kids are never left alone, never play outside unless a parent is watching, never shown how to do things - just do it for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-31828764

This is why I am hesitant to free range parent.

This is exactly WHY I think there should be free-range parenting. The older siblings had enough street smarts and common sense to thwart the attempt. There are teenagers in this area that are nervous about being alone. Nervous about crossing a street, biking into another town, and have zero critical thinking and navigating skills.

They had a babysitter who LEFT THEM ALONE!!!!!!!!!
Plus, there is a lot of middle ground between so-called free-range parenting and being a totally incompetent kid!!!!!

In this area there is not. Very coddled kids with parents that do everything for them. Kids are never left alone, never play outside unless a parent is watching, never shown how to do things - just do it for them.

You are on DCUM too much -- we are very middle of the road parents. I find it easier to do that when you have no need to attach a label to your "style" of parenting. I am not "free-range" I'm not "helicopter", I'm just a P-A-R-E-N-T.

[Anonymous]

I don't see anything wrong with the 10 year old walking out alone, but IMO that's too young to supervise a 6 year old sibling on a 1- mile walk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These parents seem to be focussing on their agenda more than on the reality of their kids/neighborhood. It's one thing to let your kids go outside and play on the same block, or at the park that is a block away. It's another thing to let them play 9-12 blocks away... if anything happened and they needed help, it would take a lot longer to get back and it's possible the hurt one would have to be left alone while the other went for help.

It's one thing to let your kids play in a neighborhood where they know people, it's something different when they are walking through areas where they know no one and there are random adults hanging around[b] or a place where lots of cars are driving through.

It's one thing to leave a 10 yr old in charge of a 6 yr. old if they are in a very controlled setting and you will be out for a short time (i.e. you drop off the library books 1 mi. away while they are watching tv. at home), it's something different to leave a 10 yr. old full decision-making authority over a 6 yr. old in an uncontrolled environment (outside, streets, playground where swinging and climbing are happening). Kids get injured. My own kids have have playground dramas and traumas many times.

I don't disagree with the spirit of "free range parenting" -- but I do disagree with how these particular parents are implementing it. There's free-range, and then there's just stupid or negligent. IMO, they are the latter.

The fact that they were walking in an area with lots of people around made it safer, not more dangerous. It meant that their would have been plenty of adults around to help them on the off chance they needed it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-31828764

This is why I am hesitant to free range parent.

The reason incidents like this make international news is because they are so very rare.

On the same day this event occurred, there were almost certainly multiple children killed in car accidents in both the US & Canada. We didn't hear about these children, however, because, unlike thwarted kidnappings, fatal car accidents happen every day.