I am certain that the Meitivs are also doing their best to keep from putting their children in situations that are beyond their age to handle. And since the Meitivs know their children, and you don't, there's a good chance that the Meitivs have a better idea of what their children can handle than you do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The question actually is: what would you do if you saw a child eho looked lost in a commercial area where homeless people gsther, and children do not typically walk alone?

Why is that the question? Nobody said that the children looked lost. Why would they be lost, if they're only a few blocks from home?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I grew up knowing how quickly bad things can happen and I have used that knowledge in my parenting to balance freedom and supervision to keep my children safe and healthy. I know that we can't protect our kids from any possible harm, but I will do my best to keep from putting them in situations that are beyond their age to handle.

I am certain that the Meitivs are also doing their best to keep from putting their children in situations that are beyond their age to handle. And since the Meitivs know their children, and you don't, there's a good chance that the Meitivs have a better idea of what their children can handle than you do.

My six year old relative was with a group of kids ages 6-10 playing at a park with no adults around. They were playing in a part of the park that an adult would have warned them away from because it was too close to the street. He was hit and his life was changed forever. I have talked to kids who were there when it happened and it truly would not have happened had an adult been there.

I get that kids are different but certain developmental milestones are fairly universal. Six year old children need supervision, and a ten year old is not yet ready for that and it is not fair to a ten year old to bear that responsibility. The kids who were there the day my relative was hit are adults now and they still think about that day.

If developmental milestones are universal, how come different cultures have such very different expectations of children's age-related capabilities?

Many reasons, not all of which pertain to this discussion, but partly because of differences in types of dangers that young children might be presented with.
Why expose kids to dangers that can harm them in a blink of an eye when you have the capability to teach them to protect themselves as they grow and develop? It is a rare six year old that understands the dangers of cars the way an adult does.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

CPS is supposed to act in the best interests of the children. Do you think it's in the best interests of the children to be in foster care, just to show the parents that CPS can take the children away if CPS wants to?

I don't see any reason to doubt the children's ability to walk home from the park. I don't think that they're capable of handling CPS and the police, but things are totally messed up if a child has to be capable to handle CPS and the police in order to be able to walk home from the park.

Do you really think that's CPS's motivation? You probably also thing "big pharma" is just tricking us into getting vaccines.

Then what would CPS's motivation for putting the kids in foster care be? Do you think it's in the best interests of these children to be in foster care?

The kids aren't in foster care, first of all. And the only reason they would do that is if they made a finding that the kids really weren't safe. I'm not saying they're always right, but I think they err on the side of NOT removing the kids. And if they do remove the kids, the motivation is to protect the kids.

The implicit threat with CPS is always that they will remove the kids. If you think that CPS would not remove the kids over this, that's good news.

Uh, no. The implicit threat with CPS was they had to sign something saying they wouldn't do it again. CPS isn't going to remove the kids unless they think the kids' welfare is in danger. That may happen, but not because they want to prove a point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That is not what the police report says. This is what the police report says:

On Sunday, April 12 at approximately 4:58 p.m., the Montgomery County Emergency Call Center received a call to check the welfare of two children in the area of Fenton and Easley Streets. The call was dispatched at 5:00 p.m. and the first officer arrived in the area at 5:01 p.m. The officer made contact with the complainant who directed the officer to the Fenton Street parking garage where the officer found the children. This was at 5:03 p.m.

Anyway, so what? If children stand in front of a parking garage for 5 minutes, they must be abandoned, lost, or neglected?

That's not the police report. There's the officer's report (linked either earlier in this thread or another one). It has the stuff about the garage.

http://www.mymcpnews.com/2015/04/13/possible-child-neglect-in-silver-spring-investigated/

Detectives from the Montgomery County Police – Special Victims Investigations Division and investigators from Child Protective Services are investigating possible child neglect allegations that occurred yesterday in Silver Spring.

On Sunday, April 12 at approximately 4:58 p.m., the Montgomery County Emergency Call Center received a call to check the welfare of two children in the area of Fenton and Easley Streets. The call was dispatched at 5:00 p.m. and the first officer arrived in the area at 5:01 p.m. The officer made contact with the complainant who directed the officer to the Fenton Street parking garage where the officer found the children. This was at 5:03 p.m. The officer observed a homeless subject who he was familiar with, eyeing the children. This male subject remained in the area during the time that the officer was there with the children.

The officer began by identifying the victim children and notifying his supervisors. At 5:16 p.m., he contacted Child Protective Services (CPS), per established protocol. Under Maryland law, police officers who become aware of circumstances involving possible child abuse or neglect are mandated to contact representatives of Child Protective Services.

At approximately 6:10 p.m., the officer contacted another CPS employee for guidance. At 6:41 p.m., the original CPS worker contacted the officer and stated that a decision was still forthcoming from within CPS.

At 7:18 p.m., a decision was made to transport the children to the CPS offices located at 1301 Piccard Drive in Rockville. The officer was also advised that CPS would notify the parents. The officer followed the direction of the CPS worker as procedures dictate – due to the serious nature of a Child Protective Services investigation and concern for the welfare of the children, they cannot be returned home until their safety can be assured.

Prior to being transported to the CPS offices, one of the children asked to use the bathroom. After an approximate 20 minute ride to CPS, the officer and children arrived at CPS at approximately 7:43 p.m. A bathroom was made available at that time.

While the children were with the officer, they told the officer that they were hungry and thirsty, stating that they had last eaten hamburgers between 2 p.m. and 3 p.m. that afternoon. The officer related these facts to the CPS employee and advised that he had provided his own bottles of water to them. The officer had his personal lunch with him as well and was giving it to the children when the older child advised that he and his sister had food allergies – at that point the officer did not want to provide any food item that might cause an adverse reaction to the children so he did not give them his lunch as planned.

Investigators from Child Protective Services as well as detectives from the Montgomery County Police – Special Victims Investigations Division continue to work together on this event. There will be no disposition regarding this case until the investigation is complete.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was 4 when my parents started teaching me and practicing. Why? Because come Sept. 4 I had to walk to school by myself and cross many streets - all at the age of 4. I was not 5 until December of that year. The largest 4-lane road had a crossing guard. There weren't any children my age in my neighborhood, so I didn't meet up with other kids until I was out of my neighborhood. And they were all elementary kids as well. We practiced all summer and played games about what to do if certain situations arose. Many other families practiced as well. I felt so proud and prepared on my first day! And no this wasn't some small town. I grew up just outside of DC.

So you think kids should be able to roam unsupervised at 4. Ok. We definitely disagree. Just because you survived doesn't mean that's a good benchmark.

I'm not saying that all children are capable of walking to school unsupervised at age 4. My husband shouldn't have been able to walk to school unsupervised at age 15!

But this is not an all or nothing kind of thing. Baby steps of responsibility, when mastered, then lead to more responsibility.

Suddenly telling a child it's OK at age 8 to walk to the park alone without first letting them go to the corner and back at an earlier age can be a terrifying experience or worse yet, a total disregard of the previously set down rules. These kind of life skills have to acquired and honed. Skill, thought, and confidence developed over a lifetime leads to a confident and self-assured adult.

Every parent needs to know their own child's maturity, skills, and limitations and work within those parameters. No hard-and-fast age rules can ever substitute for a parent's knowledge of their own child's abilities.

I remember my mom telling me as an adult, that the first week that I made that walk at age 4, she followed me just out of sight to make sure I succeeded. But I thought I was totally rocking it on my own. I clearly was a very mature 4-year-old and my mother knew it. lol