Free-range kids picked up AGAIN by police

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
+1000. You don't have to be a helicopter parent to think a 6 year old needs supervision. I'm not letting my 6 year old walk a half a mile to the park alone. I would let her do it with me watching from a distance, sure. But I'm not a helicopter parent in the sense that I'd do her homework for her or mediate her disputes for her.

Neither did the Meitivs.

Funny how the helicopters keep making this story more and more "scary" in their eyes. Abandoned garages, evil homeless people, all alone, helpless, dark outside, wandering.... It was 2 siblings walking home from a park on a sunny day. Something you and your siblings used to do all the time because your parents weren't as paranoid as you now are!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
+1000. You don't have to be a helicopter parent to think a 6 year old needs supervision. I'm not letting my 6 year old walk a half a mile to the park alone. I would let her do it with me watching from a distance, sure. But I'm not a helicopter parent in the sense that I'd do her homework for her or mediate her disputes for her.

Neither did the Meitivs.

Right. She had a 10 year old with her, who doesn't even know the difference between "bring/brought/brang". I wonder if this 10 year old is very capable? He isn't verbally. My 6 year old is more advanced than that. The point is not to put down that kid (poor kid, really), but that WE DON"T KNOW the circumstances. Which is why CPS investigates. You guys are all assuming that this was all good because you are comfortable assuming these parents are reasonable. We just don't know that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
+1000. You don't have to be a helicopter parent to think a 6 year old needs supervision. I'm not letting my 6 year old walk a half a mile to the park alone. I would let her do it with me watching from a distance, sure. But I'm not a helicopter parent in the sense that I'd do her homework for her or mediate her disputes for her.

Neither did the Meitivs.

Funny how the helicopters keep making this story more and more "scary" in their eyes. Abandoned garages, evil homeless people, all alone, helpless, dark outside, wandering.... It was 2 siblings walking home from a park on a sunny day. Something you and your siblings used to do all the time because your parents weren't as paranoid as you now are!!

No we didn't. We had a park across a 2-lane road from our neighborhood. Not allowed to go there without an adult because of the road. Allowed to roam in the neighborhood, but we could always be spotted/located by someone's mom or dad if they wanted to. Born 1975. Plenty independent, thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Md. free-range parents to file lawsuit against CPS to fight the "unlawful seizure of their children."

http://www.wusa9.com/story/news/local/maryland/2015/04/14/free-range-parenting-lawsuit-cps/25759523/

I don't like this couple and I'm on CPS side on this one, but I'm actually glad they're suing. Let's get this issue resolved. Is CPS overstepping? I read the regs to be pretty clear that you're not supposed to leave a kid under 8 unsupervised, and the supervision must be by someone 11 (if sibling) or 13 or older. But it's a bit fuzzy whether that applies to public spaces or just at home. So let's get it resolved already. Regardless, I expect there will not be any finding of liability on the part of the police or CPS. They're going to be able to show that they're legally obligated to follow up on the report and not just turn the kids over to the parents without some investigation. To me, the only thing they may have done wrong is take too long in resolving it. But I'm not sure how that leads to any liability.
I also fully expect that if this couple (and all the spittle-flinging crazies on this thread) succeed in removing any regulations for young children being left unsupervised, they will then vilify CPS for NOT protecting unsupervised young kids when something does happen as a result of that. Of course, most of the time, the bad stuff that happens to unsupervised kids doesn't make the news. And I also think that a *lot* of the reason that people think these parents are good parents is simply because they look like us and our friends. A lot packed into that level of bias.

First off, they don't look like me. Second, I think they are good parents because I used to do the same when I was a kid and I now do the same with my kids. I think they (my kids) are better off for it. Stop generalizing to prove a point that can not be proven.

They are wealthy and white. And most of the people up in arms about this are wealthy and white. Are you seriously disputing that? I think they're crappy parents because they decided to make their point by traumatizing their kids. The dog bites you once, don't throw your kid in front of it. If you think the law is unjust, work to change it. The knew this would happen and went for it anyway.

Please post the law that says it is illegal for a 6 and 10yr old to walk home from a park without parent supervision? I am curious to see what you post because there isn't one. How about you start finding ways to make it a law for kids to not play outside alone, ever - if you that having no law for it is unjust.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
+1000. You don't have to be a helicopter parent to think a 6 year old needs supervision. I'm not letting my 6 year old walk a half a mile to the park alone. I would let her do it with me watching from a distance, sure. But I'm not a helicopter parent in the sense that I'd do her homework for her or mediate her disputes for her.

Neither did the Meitivs.

Funny how the helicopters keep making this story more and more "scary" in their eyes. Abandoned garages, evil homeless people, all alone, helpless, dark outside, wandering.... It was 2 siblings walking home from a park on a sunny day. Something you and your siblings used to do all the time because your parents weren't as paranoid as you now are!!

I'm not a helicopter, but I'm also not assuming it was all rainbows and sunshine. something caused the people to call the police. I don't know if there was something bad going on, but you don't either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
+1000. You don't have to be a helicopter parent to think a 6 year old needs supervision. I'm not letting my 6 year old walk a half a mile to the park alone. I would let her do it with me watching from a distance, sure. But I'm not a helicopter parent in the sense that I'd do her homework for her or mediate her disputes for her.

Neither did the Meitivs.

Right. She had a 10 year old with her, who doesn't even know the difference between "bring/brought/brang". I wonder if this 10 year old is very capable? He isn't verbally. My 6 year old is more advanced than that. The point is not to put down that kid (poor kid, really), but that WE DON"T KNOW the circumstances. Which is why CPS investigates. You guys are all assuming that this was all good because you are comfortable assuming these parents are reasonable. We just don't know that.

Obviously the 10-year-old is incapable because he doesn't know the past tense of "to bring". Really? If I were you, I would be ashamed of myself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Md. free-range parents to file lawsuit against CPS to fight the "unlawful seizure of their children."

http://www.wusa9.com/story/news/local/maryland/2015/04/14/free-range-parenting-lawsuit-cps/25759523/

I don't like this couple and I'm on CPS side on this one, but I'm actually glad they're suing. Let's get this issue resolved. Is CPS overstepping? I read the regs to be pretty clear that you're not supposed to leave a kid under 8 unsupervised, and the supervision must be by someone 11 (if sibling) or 13 or older. But it's a bit fuzzy whether that applies to public spaces or just at home. So let's get it resolved already. Regardless, I expect there will not be any finding of liability on the part of the police or CPS. They're going to be able to show that they're legally obligated to follow up on the report and not just turn the kids over to the parents without some investigation. To me, the only thing they may have done wrong is take too long in resolving it. But I'm not sure how that leads to any liability.
I also fully expect that if this couple (and all the spittle-flinging crazies on this thread) succeed in removing any regulations for young children being left unsupervised, they will then vilify CPS for NOT protecting unsupervised young kids when something does happen as a result of that. Of course, most of the time, the bad stuff that happens to unsupervised kids doesn't make the news. And I also think that a *lot* of the reason that people think these parents are good parents is simply because they look like us and our friends. A lot packed into that level of bias.

First off, they don't look like me. Second, I think they are good parents because I used to do the same when I was a kid and I now do the same with my kids. I think they (my kids) are better off for it. Stop generalizing to prove a point that can not be proven.

They are wealthy and white. And most of the people up in arms about this are wealthy and white. Are you seriously disputing that? I think they're crappy parents because they decided to make their point by traumatizing their kids. The dog bites you once, don't throw your kid in front of it. If you think the law is unjust, work to change it. The knew this would happen and went for it anyway.

Please post the law that says it is illegal for a 6 and 10yr old to walk home from a park without parent supervision? I am curious to see what you post because there isn't one. How about you start finding ways to make it a law for kids to not play outside alone, ever - if you that having no law for it is unjust.

Look back at the regs again that have been posted dozens of times. It's not clear whether they apply to outdoor spaces.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I'm not a helicopter, but I'm also not assuming it was all rainbows and sunshine. something caused the people to call the police. I don't know if there was something bad going on, but you don't either.

Your reasoning is that something bad must have been going on, because otherwise the people wouldn't have called the police.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Look back at the regs again that have been posted dozens of times. It's not clear whether they apply to outdoor spaces.

It's clear that they don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
+1000. You don't have to be a helicopter parent to think a 6 year old needs supervision. I'm not letting my 6 year old walk a half a mile to the park alone. I would let her do it with me watching from a distance, sure. But I'm not a helicopter parent in the sense that I'd do her homework for her or mediate her disputes for her.

Neither did the Meitivs.

Right. She had a 10 year old with her, who doesn't even know the difference between "bring/brought/brang". I wonder if this 10 year old is very capable? He isn't verbally. My 6 year old is more advanced than that. The point is not to put down that kid (poor kid, really), but that WE DON"T KNOW the circumstances. Which is why CPS investigates. You guys are all assuming that this was all good because you are comfortable assuming these parents are reasonable. We just don't know that.

Obviously the 10-year-old is incapable because he doesn't know the past tense of "to bring". Really? If I were you, I would be ashamed of myself.

Never said he's not capable. Said we don't know. And you can feel shame all you want, but no, I'm not ashamed of questioning whether this 10 year old is capable of supervising his 6yo sister.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Look back at the regs again that have been posted dozens of times. It's not clear whether they apply to outdoor spaces.

It's clear that they don't.

No, it isn't. Look at the language again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
+1000. You don't have to be a helicopter parent to think a 6 year old needs supervision. I'm not letting my 6 year old walk a half a mile to the park alone. I would let her do it with me watching from a distance, sure. But I'm not a helicopter parent in the sense that I'd do her homework for her or mediate her disputes for her.

Neither did the Meitivs.

Funny how the helicopters keep making this story more and more "scary" in their eyes. Abandoned garages, evil homeless people, all alone, helpless, dark outside, wandering.... It was 2 siblings walking home from a park on a sunny day. Something you and your siblings used to do all the time because your parents weren't as paranoid as you now are!!

No we didn't. We had a park across a 2-lane road from our neighborhood. Not allowed to go there without an adult because of the road. Allowed to roam in the neighborhood, but we could always be spotted/located by someone's mom or dad if they wanted to. Born 1975. Plenty independent, thanks.

So you were allowed to play in the neighborhood. Was your neighborhood more than 2 blocks wide because that is how far away the kids were from home when they were taken by police. And you do realize that kids grew up then and now in urban areas and know how to cross busy streets. Just because your parents didn't let you cross a 2 lane road doesn't mean your parents called 911 if they saw other kids doing it? Or did they.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
+1000. You don't have to be a helicopter parent to think a 6 year old needs supervision. I'm not letting my 6 year old walk a half a mile to the park alone. I would let her do it with me watching from a distance, sure. But I'm not a helicopter parent in the sense that I'd do her homework for her or mediate her disputes for her.

Neither did the Meitivs.

Funny how the helicopters keep making this story more and more "scary" in their eyes. Abandoned garages, evil homeless people, all alone, helpless, dark outside, wandering.... It was 2 siblings walking home from a park on a sunny day. Something you and your siblings used to do all the time because your parents weren't as paranoid as you now are!!

It was a new moon, too. And snowing. And uphill. Also, there were lions and bears.

Or, alternatively, it was 5 pm on Fenton Avenue on a warm, sunny Sunday afternoon in spring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm not a helicopter, but I'm also not assuming it was all rainbows and sunshine. something caused the people to call the police. I don't know if there was something bad going on, but you don't either.

Your reasoning is that something bad must have been going on, because otherwise the people wouldn't have called the police.

Nope, once again, my reasoning is that something bad "MIGHT" have been going on, because otherwise people wouldn't have called the police. One person? Yeah, that person might just be nuts. But two different people on different occasions? That merits a bit more agnosticism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm not a helicopter, but I'm also not assuming it was all rainbows and sunshine. something caused the people to call the police. I don't know if there was something bad going on, but you don't either.

Your reasoning is that something bad must have been going on, because otherwise the people wouldn't have called the police.

Helicopters always think there is something bad going on.