This is an embarrassment. For CPS. Obviously they have an axe to grind.

I seriously don't even understand what these kids are supposed to be protected against. Chance of stranger abduction is infinitesimal, any cognitively "normal" 10-yr-old can figure out (even large) streets (and most of us who were kids in the 70/80s figured it out waaaaay earlier than that), there's no reason to think they are going to get lost, if they were to get injured -- well, the exact same thing would likely happen if their parents were on a park bench.

(And yes I have kids. Small ones.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:6 is way too young to be without adult supervision.

Maybe for some kids, or even a lot of kids, but definitely not every kid.

No, for every kid. The end.

Six-year-olds used to be capable of being out without adult supervision. Six-year-olds in other countries to this day are capable of being out without adult supervision. Do middle-class people in the US just have particularly incompetent six-year-olds, these days?

When were six-year-olds commonly walking around without adult supervision? Be specific.

In the late 1960s and early 1970s (my experience and my partner's experience). Also in the late 1930s (my parents' experience). Is that specific enough?

No, it's not. In those days, kids moved in packs, did they not? They weren't in pairs in urban settings. Even back in the 1930s or 1960s a 6 yo wandering around alone or with just a slightly older sibling would attract attention. You're romanticizing something that isn't there.

I am baffled by this. How did the packs form? Did all of the children in these packs live in the same house? At some point, didn't individual children have to go somewhere by themselves to get to where the other children were?

I just don't get people who say "no one ever did this." Maybe YOU didn't, but there are literally millions of kids born in this country every year....maybe some of them had a slightly different experience?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These parents seem hell bent on scarring their kids. If they are so ideologically committed to being free range, then they need to move to a neighborhood where it is appropriate and acccepted. Downtown Silver Spring does not meet that description. If these kods were in a quiet neighborhood or in a nearby park with a lot of othet friends and neighbors, or even just taking a short walk to school, that would be fine. But alone in a metro downtown? Not ok. That might be appropriate starting at 13, but not a 10 and 6 year old.

The kids were actually walking to a nearby park.

I'm also interested to hear from other parents who live in Silver Spring whether it's such a dangerous neighborhood that kids shouldn't be allowed to walk around without parental supervision until they're 13. I've visited the area, and it doesn't seem like a war zone to me.

I mean a park a block away, without major traffic, filled with kids and parents known to the family. That does not describe where these kids were.

That's it? That's the limit? Otherwise you have to wait until you're 13?

If CPS then were like CPS now, every single one of my friends would have been in foster care. And I had an overprotective mother, by the standards of the day.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Since I don't think there's anything wrong with sending a six-year-old and a ten-year-old to the park by themselves, and I do think there's something seriously wrong with taking a six-year-old and ten-year-old into CPS custody for being in the park by themselves, I'm going to focus on the police and CPS actions, not on condemning the parents. It's also a lot more productive.

Really? How is it productive? What have you accomplished?

What have you accomplished in saying, "Bad parents! Bad!" on an anonymous internet message board? Maybe if you personally knew them, and they asked your opinion, and you gave it to them. But I'm assuming that's not the case.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These parents seem hell bent on scarring their kids. If they are so ideologically committed to being free range, then they need to move to a neighborhood where it is appropriate and acccepted. Downtown Silver Spring does not meet that description. If these kods were in a quiet neighborhood or in a nearby park with a lot of othet friends and neighbors, or even just taking a short walk to school, that would be fine. But alone in a metro downtown? Not ok. That might be appropriate starting at 13, but not a 10 and 6 year old.

The kids were actually walking to a nearby park.

I'm also interested to hear from other parents who live in Silver Spring whether it's such a dangerous neighborhood that kids shouldn't be allowed to walk around without parental supervision until they're 13. I've visited the area, and it doesn't seem like a war zone to me.

I mean a park a block away, without major traffic, filled with kids and parents known to the family. That does not describe where these kids were.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The parents were previously explicitly told by CPS that it was unacceptable so whether they AGREE with it or not they should stop doing it (fight it legally in the meantime if they want but stop doing it) instead of risking losing their kids, right or wrong, to make a statement.

What about CPS, though? Is it ok for CPS to take custody of children who go to the park by themselves? Is this in the best interest of the children?

Apparently it is okay for CPS to do that...and your opinion doesn't matter.

But is it in the best interest of the children? And since CPS is acting in my name, and yours, and everybody else's, my opinion actually does matter.

Then you mount a campaign to change the situation. Call the county council and Ike. Complain. Organize. Find some organization or political leader to carry the flag.

But don't send your little kids to the park alone until the system changes...especially if CPS has already investigated you and told you not to do that again. Duh.

Since I don't think there's anything wrong with sending a six-year-old and a ten-year-old to the park by themselves, and I do think there's something seriously wrong with taking a six-year-old and ten-year-old into CPS custody for being in the park by themselves, I'm going to focus on the police and CPS actions, not on condemning the parents. It's also a lot more productive.

Let's use your logic, pp. If I think it's reasonable to let my 18 or 20 year old to drink so I let them and get in trouble with the court, then I should focus my criticism on the law, the police and the courts...who are merely doing their job...rather than evaluate my parenting when I continue to allow them to drink despite having been told by the court not to allow that. Dumb. Really dumb.

I agree with the pp about wondering about the parents judgment overall.

I bet the parents called CPS themselves (or one of their looney friends)... missed the attention. Hard to have a cause without an audience.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back in the day, this mythical "free range" thing involved kids moving in packs. Safety in numbers, be in a group.

Two siblings rarely played alone at a park, even in the 1970s.

BTW, I lived the 1970s. The fondness for them that is expressed here sometimes if misguided. It wasn't that great.

Total BS. At age 10, I commuted every day to my school BY MYSELF. This included walking, taking a bus and then the tube. I lived in London. NOTHING HAPPENED.

Yep. And at 10 they wouldn't be picked up. 10 is not 6.

The 10-year-old actually did get picked up.

Right because with the 6yo. Not if she was alone.

Did the ten-year-old get picked up? Did CPS keep the ten-year-old until late at night? Yes, and yes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The parents were previously explicitly told by CPS that it was unacceptable so whether they AGREE with it or not they should stop doing it (fight it legally in the meantime if they want but stop doing it) instead of risking losing their kids, right or wrong, to make a statement.

What about CPS, though? Is it ok for CPS to take custody of children who go to the park by themselves? Is this in the best interest of the children?

Apparently it is okay for CPS to do that...and your opinion doesn't matter.

But is it in the best interest of the children? And since CPS is acting in my name, and yours, and everybody else's, my opinion actually does matter.

Then you mount a campaign to change the situation. Call the county council and Ike. Complain. Organize. Find some organization or political leader to carry the flag.

But don't send your little kids to the park alone until the system changes...especially if CPS has already investigated you and told you not to do that again. Duh.

Since I don't think there's anything wrong with sending a six-year-old and a ten-year-old to the park by themselves, and I do think there's something seriously wrong with taking a six-year-old and ten-year-old into CPS custody for being in the park by themselves, I'm going to focus on the police and CPS actions, not on condemning the parents. It's also a lot more productive.

Really? How is it productive? What have you accomplished?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I've looked it up, and I've posted it. The law is on their side. If you know of a different law, please post it.

No it isn't. You posted one set of laws and not the relevant regs. Do t have time to look it up again.

Yes, I posted the laws. If there are regulations, I sure hope that somebody posts them. I haven't seen them.

Anonymous wrote:apparently no one lives in DC where kids roam on their own all the time! Take the metro, there's always kids riding without parents, or the bus. it's a fact of life in the city.

so instead they keep these kids past dinner time and bed time. way to go CPS.

Not 6 year olds though.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back in the day, this mythical "free range" thing involved kids moving in packs. Safety in numbers, be in a group.

Two siblings rarely played alone at a park, even in the 1970s.

BTW, I lived the 1970s. The fondness for them that is expressed here sometimes if misguided. It wasn't that great.

Total BS. At age 10, I commuted every day to my school BY MYSELF. This included walking, taking a bus and then the tube. I lived in London. NOTHING HAPPENED.

Yep. And at 10 they wouldn't be picked up. 10 is not 6.

The 10-year-old actually did get picked up.

Right because with the 6yo. Not if she was alone.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:6 is way too young to be without adult supervision.

She is with her 10 year old brother walking to the park.

A 10 year old isn't an adult And how responsible can he be?

Anonymous wrote:The parents' extremely poor judgment about defying CPS makes me doubt their judgment about everything.

Same here. They do not have their children's best interests at heart.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These parents are horrible. They obviously didn't learn their lesson but they will. They seem so lazy. Would it kill them to spend time with the kids? Selfish idiots.

Oh, have you met them? If not, how do you know?

Though I agree that they obviously did not learn their lesson -- the lesson being that, no matter how right the parents are, and how much the law is on the parents' side, if the police and CPS want to take their children away, the police and CPS can take their children away.

The law is not on their side. Look it up.

I've looked it up, and I've posted it. The law is on their side. If you know of a different law, please post it.

No it isn't. You posted one set of laws and not the relevant regs. Do t have time to look it up again.