Anonymous wrote:

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.

I agree. They've had 3 run ins over the issue. After the second incident, they were taken to court and found guilty of child neglect. I am sure that CPS has told them, in no uncertain terms, not to let their kids walk around alone. They've even stated to the media that they aren't changing their behavior, and that they weren't surprised by the outcome.

At this point, the only thing that I can conclude is that it matters more to them to be in the spotlight and make a point, than it does to keep their kids emotionally safe. Whether or not I agree with CPS's decision, I can't agree with a decision to do something that they knew would likely lead to a situation like this.

I'll also say that I think the bolded in a misreading of the statistics. In the 70's there were lots of children playing outside, and walking places outside. Let's simplify it and say there were a million kids outside, and 4 kidnappings a year, so the odds were 4 in a million that your particular kid would be the victim of a kidnapper. Now there are far fewer kids outside. Let's say there are a quarter million kids still playing outside. Even if the number of kidnappings is halved, to 2, it still means that the odds for any particular child are doubled.

Of course the odds are still quite low, the greater odds are of being hit by a car, but I'm not convinced they're actually lower. Since I can't find statistics on the number of kids allowed to play alone unsupervised, I can't come up with any real statistics.

I'm sure it can vary. My friend was the subject of a CPS investigation in Philly - a neighbor heard her son crying and he bruised easily. She felt that CPS conducted the investigation professionally and closed it out quickly. That's not to say others may not have had a bad experience, but in some cases, CPS does its job well.


Thus proving that point that reasonable parents should be aware they could be investigated by CPS at any time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I agree. They've had 3 run ins over the issue. After the second incident, they were taken to court and found guilty of child neglect. I am sure that CPS has told them, in no uncertain terms, not to let their kids walk around alone. They've even stated to the media that they aren't changing their behavior, and that they weren't surprised by the outcome.

At this point, the only thing that I can conclude is that it matters more to them to be in the spotlight and make a point, than it does to keep their kids emotionally safe. Whether or not I agree with CPS's decision, I can't agree with a decision to do something that they knew would likely lead to a situation like this.

I'll also say that I think the bolded in a misreading of the statistics. In the 70's there were lots of children playing outside, and walking places outside. Let's simplify it and say there were a million kids outside, and 4 kidnappings a year, so the odds were 4 in a million that your particular kid would be the victim of a kidnapper. Now there are far fewer kids outside. Let's say there are a quarter million kids still playing outside. Even if the number of kidnappings is halved, to 2, it still means that the odds for any particular child are doubled.

Of course the odds are still quite low, the greater odds are of being hit by a car, but I'm not convinced they're actually lower. Since I can't find statistics on the number of kids allowed to play alone unsupervised, I can't come up with any real statistics.

But we have a generation of entitled, self centered, unable to cope with any negativity, shelter brats. Look at these kids who take parents to job interviews!!! They have been given no freedom. It's a generation ladeled from one opportunity to the next!

I don't think that's because parents walk them across the street until they're 8

Yes. That's part of it.

It continues as the get older. And in Maryland, it's mandated by the law.

Actually it isn't a law!! They broke no law. There are one law pertaining to children & age. One cannot leave kids in a car alone unless over 13.

Whether or not I agree that these kids should be able to do this type of thing, I can't imagine doing it after the first instance of CPS involvement. Seems kind of stupid and asking for trouble.


Someone has to take a stand against Big Brother government. It's none of their business!!!

Anonymous wrote:

It remained "under investigation" for over a year, with nothing coming of it. Just because you're privileged enough not to encounter CPS doesn't mean they don't have a scary amount of power to ruin your life with an "investigation". It takes VERY little for this to happen.

I'm sure it can vary. My friend was the subject of a CPS investigation in Philly - a neighbor heard her son crying and he bruised easily. She felt that CPS conducted the investigation professionally and closed it out quickly. That's not to say others may not have had a bad experience, but in some cases, CPS does its job well.

Anonymous wrote:

It remained "under investigation" for over a year, with nothing coming of it. Just because you're privileged enough not to encounter CPS doesn't mean they don't have a scary amount of power to ruin your life with an "investigation". It takes VERY little for this to happen.

I'm sure it can vary. My friend was the subject of a CPS investigation in Philly - a neighbor heard her son crying and he bruised easily. She felt that CPS conducted the investigation professionally and closed it out quickly. That's not to say others may not have had a bad experience, but in some cases, CPS does its job well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

While it wasn't the end of the world and of course I will always help a child who is injured, I was late getting my dad to his chemo appointment as a result of the incident, and would have much preferred that the 5-year-old child's own parent be responsible for him.

Also, what if the child had asked for help from a perfectly nice looking adult who ended up being a predator or a kidnapper? This child lucked out by choosing a responsible and helpful parent, but let's face it, not everyone out there has good intent.

Things were not so perfect back in the seventies. I lived through them, but I knew and knew of lots of kids who had bad things happen to them because adults were not keeping close track of what was going on. That is exactly why I was a much more involved parent than many of the parents in the seventies were. Too much can go wrong when parents are so far out of the picture.

Odds are that they won't be kidnapped. The vast majority of kidnaps are due to divorce/custody issues. Fear mongering!!

Anonymous wrote:Whether or not I agree that these kids should be able to do this type of thing, I can't imagine doing it after the first instance of CPS involvement. Seems kind of stupid and asking for trouble.

Anonymous wrote:The article I read said that the parents started looking for the kids at 6pm and were still looking at 8pm.
The way I am reading it makes it sound like they didnt call the Police during this time? Why not?
If my kid was missing I would be calling the Police for help.

It remained "under investigation" for over a year, with nothing coming of it. Just because you're privileged enough not to encounter CPS doesn't mean they don't have a scary amount of power to ruin your life with an "investigation". It takes VERY little for this to happen.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I agree. They've had 3 run ins over the issue. After the second incident, they were taken to court and found guilty of child neglect. I am sure that CPS has told them, in no uncertain terms, not to let their kids walk around alone. They've even stated to the media that they aren't changing their behavior, and that they weren't surprised by the outcome.

At this point, the only thing that I can conclude is that it matters more to them to be in the spotlight and make a point, than it does to keep their kids emotionally safe. Whether or not I agree with CPS's decision, I can't agree with a decision to do something that they knew would likely lead to a situation like this.

I'll also say that I think the bolded in a misreading of the statistics. In the 70's there were lots of children playing outside, and walking places outside. Let's simplify it and say there were a million kids outside, and 4 kidnappings a year, so the odds were 4 in a million that your particular kid would be the victim of a kidnapper. Now there are far fewer kids outside. Let's say there are a quarter million kids still playing outside. Even if the number of kidnappings is halved, to 2, it still means that the odds for any particular child are doubled.

Of course the odds are still quite low, the greater odds are of being hit by a car, but I'm not convinced they're actually lower. Since I can't find statistics on the number of kids allowed to play alone unsupervised, I can't come up with any real statistics.

But we have a generation of entitled, self centered, unable to cope with any negativity, shelter brats. Look at these kids who take parents to job interviews!!! They have been given no freedom. It's a generation ladeled from one opportunity to the next!

I don't think that's because parents walk them across the street until they're 8

Yes. That's part of it.

It continues as the get older. And in Maryland, it's mandated by the law.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I agree. They've had 3 run ins over the issue. After the second incident, they were taken to court and found guilty of child neglect. I am sure that CPS has told them, in no uncertain terms, not to let their kids walk around alone. They've even stated to the media that they aren't changing their behavior, and that they weren't surprised by the outcome.

At this point, the only thing that I can conclude is that it matters more to them to be in the spotlight and make a point, than it does to keep their kids emotionally safe. Whether or not I agree with CPS's decision, I can't agree with a decision to do something that they knew would likely lead to a situation like this.

I'll also say that I think the bolded in a misreading of the statistics. In the 70's there were lots of children playing outside, and walking places outside. Let's simplify it and say there were a million kids outside, and 4 kidnappings a year, so the odds were 4 in a million that your particular kid would be the victim of a kidnapper. Now there are far fewer kids outside. Let's say there are a quarter million kids still playing outside. Even if the number of kidnappings is halved, to 2, it still means that the odds for any particular child are doubled.

Of course the odds are still quite low, the greater odds are of being hit by a car, but I'm not convinced they're actually lower. Since I can't find statistics on the number of kids allowed to play alone unsupervised, I can't come up with any real statistics.

But we have a generation of entitled, self centered, unable to cope with any negativity, shelter brats. Look at these kids who take parents to job interviews!!! They have been given no freedom. It's a generation ladeled from one opportunity to the next!

I don't think that's because parents walk them across the street until they're 8