At what age would you leave your kids in the car?

[~Tara~]

I leave my crew in the locked truck, within my sight, with Eldest in charge (11 next month) to do those little 5 minute things.

As others have said...only for those little zippy things. Always locked. Kids always stay buckled in the back, windows up. Vehicle always within my sight.

 

And Peek...I couldn't even begin to count the number of times I have left a sleeping one in the vehicle, parked in my own yard.

[Joanne]

To me *none* of these is bad as letting young kids ride their bikes unattended for hours through the neighborhood.

 

Define "young" as it relates to this statement.

[Nestof3]

also assume we are speaking of children under the age of 18yrs.

 

Why 18? Because they are "legally" adults? I just don't let the gov't determine when I feel my kids are grownup enough to be in a car.

 

So, I guess your children will not have driver's licenses until they're 18? We know some families who have done this, but generally to save on insurance, or because it didn't seem necessary, not because they didn't feel they were safe in a car alone.

[Peek a Boo]

Define "young" as it relates to this statement.

 

 

i would apply "young" directly as the state [in our case, TX] would: a child under the age of 7 alone in a locked vehicle for over 5 minutes is illegal. In CA, that would be 13yo.

 

Why is it legal and/or OK to let that same "7 yo" out of your sight into a neighborhood w/o "proper supervision" of someone at least 14?? And in CA --I suppose many kids 13 and younger routinely ride bikes to and fro, w/o "proper supervision?

 

For all those who say "all kids, anyone under 18, never alone in a vehicle" do you let your kids do other things where their safety becomes questionable? At a park-- walking to the store-- riding their bikes out of site --leaving them at the library/other place w/o direct supervision.

 

I always find it fascinating that parents won't leave a kid alone in a locked car for 5-10 minutes but will send those same kids to camps w/ "but they've been background checked" strangers. Or send them off to let them ride their bikes out of sight. Or let them play at the playground by themselves. Or any number of "unsupervised" activities.

[kdeno]

wow~ that is a really long time away:tongue_smilie:

 

I just wanted to add that I would want an older child in the car also

[Excelsior! Academy]

Define "young" as it relates to this statement.

 

 

I agree. It does matter. In our neighborhood kiddos as young as six regulary ride bikes unsupervised.

[Mrs. H.]

To me *none* of these is bad as letting young kids ride their bikes unattended for hours through the neighborhood.

 

When I was a kid, I lived in a small neighborhood with only one way in and out. My brother and I were allowed to basically roam all day, either on our bikes or on foot, with the other kids in the neighborhood. I'm sure it was much the same with most of you.

 

Before we moved out to the country where we are now, we lived in a neighborhood that also housed a sexual predator (we check online). My sil lived one road over, and allowed her 12 year old daughter to freely ride her bike all over the neighborhood alone, from daylight to dark. My then 9 year old daughter was not allowed to leave the yard unless she was accompanied by an adult, and sil thought I was way too protective.

 

In my opinion, that 12 year old daughter was not prepared for what to do if the predator in our area tried to do something to her. She could have been abducted in an instant and it would have taken hours for my sil to realize she was gone instead of out riding.

 

My kids are allowed to play in our yard (5 acres) without me or dh, but there must be at least two of them together (one to run for help). They are allowed to ride their bikes in our driveway (looong driveway) and yard, but not on the road, because it is busy with traffic, and ends out onto an even busier highway.

[Joanne]

Originally Posted by Joanne

Define "young" as it relates to this statement.

 

 

i would apply "young" directly as the state [in our case, TX] would: a child under the age of 7 alone in a locked vehicle for over 5 minutes is illegal. In CA, that would be 13yo.

 

Why is it legal and/or OK to let that same "7 yo" out of your site into a neighborhood w/o "proper supervision" of someone at least 14?? And in CA --I suppose many kids 13 and younger routinely ride bikes to and fro, w/o "proper supervision?

 

For all those who say "all kids, anyone under 18, never alone in a vehicle" do you let your kids do other things where their safety becomes questionable? At a park-- walking to the store-- riding their bikes out of site --leaving them at the library/other place w/o direct supervision.

 

I always find it fascinating that parents won't leave a kid alone in a locked car for 5-10 minutes but will send those same kids to camps w/ "but they've been background checked" strangers. Or send them off to let them ride their bikes out of sight. Or let them play at the playground by themselves. Or any number of "unsupervised" activities.

 

It's a very flawed comparison.

 

I mean, I "get" the perceived logic behind your wonderings and fascination. But allowing (especially group) intermittently supervised play in neighborhoods and trips to local businesses *is* inherently different than leaving a kid in a car.

 

I'll answer the question, with what will seem to be contradictory answers. I try to avoid leaving my kids in the car before school age. I never left them solo as babies, toddlers or preschoolers. And probably not early school age simply because I had 3 closely spaced kids. I probably would leave them to run into the post office when my oldest approached 10 - depending on circumstances.

 

That said, I don't believe it is "leaving them" to walk 7 steps to drop off a block buster item but I would consider it "leaving them" if I had to go into an establishment.

 

My kids started playing outside in both the neighborhoods I've lived in starting at school age and nearly always in groups. My oldest only recently began leaving "shouting voice range", with permission and specific rules. If he's going, the others can go with him. They usually also have age peers in the forms of my daycare kids and neighborhood kids as well.

 

We do camps and sleepovers (host and attend) and lock ins.

[Peek a Boo]

It's a very flawed comparison.

 

I mean, I "get" the perceived logic behind your wonderings and fascination. But allowing (especially group) intermittently supervised play in neighborhoods and trips to local businesses *is* inherently different than leaving a kid in a car.

 

I'll answer the question, with what will seem to be contradictory answers. I try to avoid leaving my kids in the car before school age. I never left them solo as babies, toddlers or preschoolers. And probably not early school age simply because I had 3 closely spaced kids. I probably would leave them to run into the post office when my oldest approached 10 - depending on circumstances.

 

That said, I don't believe it is "leaving them" to walk 7 steps to drop off a block buster item but I would consider it "leaving them" if I had to go into an establishment.

 

My kids started playing outside in both the neighborhoods I've lived in starting at school age and nearly always in groups. My oldest only recently began leaving "shouting voice range", with permission and specific rules. If he's going, the others can go with him. They usually also have age peers in the forms of my daycare kids and neighborhood kids as well.

 

We do camps and sleepovers (host and attend) and lock ins.

 

actually, it's NOT flawed --you are leaving kids unsupervised, period.

That's not perception, that's fact.

 

the only thing "inherently" different is that one situation has a kid locked in a car where you can see them. Another has them out and about where you can't. Usually for much longer than 5-10 minutes. well, that and "there's a law" about one :) that makes them *legally* different, but not necessarily "inherently" different.

 

I'd have to say there are plenty of times I see kids out solo, so the "nearly always in groups" is really irrelevant. Or I can use it w/ the "i only leave them locked in the car 'in a group'." Or we can limit the analogy to solo activities only. Pick your logic :-)

 

would we leave a kid that was constantly unbuckling and playing around the dash in a car alone? Not anymore than we'd let an irresponsible older kid leave the yard alone. Ditto w/ groups --some groups can handle scenarios better than other groups. {{and i posted my specifics at the beginning of the thread}}.

 

your statement "I'll answer the question, with what will seem to be contradictory answers" doesn't strike me as contradictory unless i missed a post: my question really only applies to those who WOULDN't leave a 10-13yo kid locked in a car but WOULD let them play unsupervised around the neighborhood. Your pattern seems reasonable to me --unsupervised for short amounts in a locked car progressing to unsupervised away from home for longer periods. i see a natural progression there.

 

i do think the age peers thing kinda intrigues me too, legally. Why would a similar-age peer be OK for one unsupervised activity [playing outside], but not for another [waiting in a locked car for ten minutes]?

 

That being said, it really does boil down to mother's instinct and the many variables in play for each situation. as i said previously --pick the statistics you wanna side with. we each have our own biases, lol.