Anonymous wrote:what if the kids don't want to be free range kids? what if they don't want to go tot he park by themselves, if the older kid doesn't want to have to be responsible for the younger one? what if it wasn't a short trip to the park, but they were there most of the day -- or are there or by themselves most days? i know several parents who are so determined to do what they want to do (work out, run errands, etc) that they leave their kids alone even when the kids ask them not to/tell them they are afraid.

Yes, the parents probably shove their kids out the door and tell them there will be hell to pay if they come back too soon. This thread is sadly getting too damn dumb.

Anonymous wrote:And that's precisely why we have laws setting appropriate age limits, pp...so lazy parents can't unilaterally decide that their 7 year old is mature enough to stay home alone or handle a trip to 7-11 to buy mom some smokes.

I'll be sure to tell my mother that she was lazy when she let me walk to school by myself in first grade. Every other parent in the neighborhood was lazy too, I guess.

And that's precisely why we have laws setting appropriate age limits, pp...so lazy parents can't unilaterally decide that their 7 year old is mature enough to stay home alone or handle a trip to 7-11 to buy mom some smokes.

Anonymous wrote:what if the kids don't want to be free range kids? what if they don't want to go tot he park by themselves, if the older kid doesn't want to have to be responsible for the younger one? what if it wasn't a short trip to the park, but they were there most of the day -- or are there or by themselves most days? i know several parents who are so determined to do what they want to do (work out, run errands, etc) that they leave their kids alone even when the kids ask them not to/tell them they are afraid.

What if it rained spaghetti? What if my children actually hung up their towels instead of leaving them on the floor?

what if the kids don't want to be free range kids? what if they don't want to go tot he park by themselves, if the older kid doesn't want to have to be responsible for the younger one? what if it wasn't a short trip to the park, but they were there most of the day -- or are there or by themselves most days? i know several parents who are so determined to do what they want to do (work out, run errands, etc) that they leave their kids alone even when the kids ask them not to/tell them they are afraid.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Well, you can focus on the parents, or you can focus on the police and CPS -- you know, the law. I think the actions of the police and CPS are the issue here.

Maybe. But I wouldn't risk putting my kids through another incident with CPS over my desire to have them be "free-range." No way.

+1

So, let's say crime isn't the primary concern. Why risk your kids getting picked up by the police or CPS, all in the name of "Free Range?" No way for me too. Who knows what kind of crooked cop might pick up the kids. Ugh.

Furthermore, I can't imagine how differently all this would play out of the free range kids were black. But I guess that's a whole other thread.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's the law that dictates what age a kid must be before being left alone or caring for another child. And the police know what the law is, so that's why the cop picked up the kids and called CPS.

You see, we have laws that set age requirements to drive, drink, smoke, etc. And you can't break those laws just because you think your kid is mature enough to handle it. Same thing applies here.

But the worst part is that the parents knew better than to do this since CPS investigated them and told them explicitly not to do this...yet they did. My seven year old heard this story on the news and asked me WHY the parents let the kids go to the park if they knew they could get in trouble. So my seven year old gets it, while those parents obviously do not.

CPS does NOT have the right to tell the parents not to not break the law. This is beyond their scope and I can't believe more parents on DCUM aren't completely freaked out about the county interfering in this family's affairs.

Wait. You think dealing with people breaking laws related to child welfare is beyond the scope of CPS? What is it you think IS within their scope?

...and the cop who saw the homeless man eyeing the kids knew him (all the cops know the local homeless)...and he would know if they guy had a record (for sex offenses or anything), had addiction issues (standard), was mentally ill (common), lived in the garage, etc. That's all I'm saying.

Anonymous wrote:

I'm not commenting on the weather, pp. Rather, I'm pointing out that homeless people sleep in the garages in DTSS...year round, regardless of the weather. I only mentioned the cold part since that's what prompts outreach workers to look for folks sleeping outdoors.

Yes, and...?

Anonymous wrote:It's the law that dictates what age a kid must be before being left alone or caring for another child. And the police know what the law is, so that's why the cop picked up the kids and called CPS.

You see, we have laws that set age requirements to drive, drink, smoke, etc. And you can't break those laws just because you think your kid is mature enough to handle it. Same thing applies here.

But the worst part is that the parents knew better than to do this since CPS investigated them and told them explicitly not to do this...yet they did. My seven year old heard this story on the news and asked me WHY the parents let the kids go to the park if they knew they could get in trouble. So my seven year old gets it, while those parents obviously do not.

CPS does NOT have the right to tell the parents not to not break the law. This is beyond their scope and I can't believe more parents on DCUM aren't completely freaked out about the county interfering in this family's affairs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you knew how many homeless sex offenders live in DTSS (and can't even get into the emergency shelter) you'd probably be shocked. When it's cold outside and the outreach workers look for the unsheltered, parking garages are the first place they look.

Did you go outside yesterday?

The PP didn't say it was cold yesterday. The PP said that homeless people often shelter in garages, and that when people go looking for homeless people because it is cold, that is the first place they look.

I'm wondering how that is relevant?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you knew how many homeless sex offenders live in DTSS (and can't even get into the emergency shelter) you'd probably be shocked. When it's cold outside and the outreach workers look for the unsheltered, parking garages are the first place they look.

Did you go outside yesterday?

I'm not commenting on the weather, pp. Rather, I'm pointing out that homeless people sleep in the garages in DTSS...year round, regardless of the weather. I only mentioned the cold part since that's what prompts outreach workers to look for folks sleeping outdoors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you knew how many homeless sex offenders live in DTSS (and can't even get into the emergency shelter) you'd probably be shocked. When it's cold outside and the outreach workers look for the unsheltered, parking garages are the first place they look.

Did you go outside yesterday?

The PP didn't say it was cold yesterday. The PP said that homeless people often shelter in garages, and that when people go looking for homeless people because it is cold, that is the first place they look.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't believe the Post published a column about this that only quotes the parents. They are hardly the most reliable narrators at this stage.

Kids roam all the time in MoCo without being picked up by police. I posted earlier about dozens of kids biking and walking up and down my very busy street every day; no parents and no one blinks an eye. These two kids have now repeatedly - at least 3 times - been in situations where random strangers have felt they were at risk.

There is no problem with kids being "free range" in this area; the issue is this family, and while I don't quite understand it, it doesn't sound to me that CPS is unwarranted here. Did anyone notice that in the police report, the kids were not found in a park - they were found in a parking garage. Enough with the rants against the police state. It's just not applicable here.

The police report does not say that the kids were found in a parking garage.

And if you are seeing crowds of middle-class kids in middle-class neighborhoods out and about on their own, with no parents, and no one blinks and eye, well, where do you live? It sounds like a nice neighborhood that I might want to move to.

Poolesville.

Which street in Poolesville is "very busy"? Also, how many children who go to Poolesville ES and live in walking distance walk to school by themselves?

The message the actions of CPS sends to parents is that children cannot play outside. My kids ride bikes all the time in our neighborhood without my supervision. They go exploring and build forts in the wooded area close by. My son even broke both of his arms while riding his bike. He walked home, we went to emergency room, he was fine. It builds character, self sufficenty, strong kids.

As a kid, I was outside playing all the time. My curfew was the streets lights coming on or when I was hungry and I turned out just fine. My kids will not sit in the house on a beautiful day. They will be outside playing and I may or may not be out supervising them.

If you feel the need to hover over your children at all times, that's great. I don't feel the need to. We enjoy living our lives but not fretting over all the bad things that could happen that I may or may not be able to prevent.