Help me understand a common child at home alone policy..........

[Joanne]

I've known many parents who will leave their kids home alone, at various ages and depending on their maturity, history, training and responsibility.

 

A large percentage of those leave their kids with the rule that the child can't play outside if the parent is not home.

 

I have never understood this. It seems to me that if a child is old enough to be left home alone, they are old enough to play outside under the same circumstances they play when you are home.

 

Maybe it's just the situation I have? There are always other kids out and about. And parents that I know fairly well for neighbors. We have informally agreed on rules for behavior, what property to play on, how to respect property and each other. My kids never play outside alone; even if neighborhood kids are not out, I have 3 kids.

 

I realize that I *don't* perceive the world as a big, bad, dangerous place for kids. And I realize that I don't perceive the risk of stranger abduction from the neighborhood as a risk. Maybe that is the difference?

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

 

I have never understood this. It seems to me that if a child is old enough to be left home alone, they are old enough to play outside under the same circumstances they play when you are home.

 

 

 

I'm of the notion that there are fewer and more familiar variables at play in my house than outside it. It's all about the math, really.

 

I consider myself moderately cautious.

[Mrs Mungo]

I would assume it's because you can control what goes on in your home a little bit better than you can control what goes on outside of the home. There are roads to cross, wandering dogs, wandering people, all sorts of other factors that come into play. Yes, they could get hurt in the home but it's more likely they could seriously hurt outside. My eldest has stayed home a couple of times when necessary (example: I was running a family readiness group meeting, hubby was deployed and she was sick) but has instructions not to answer the door or phone, etc.

[bkpan]

I assume that my dc will be somewhat safer inside my home than out. So, if I am not at home, I wouldn't want my dc to have to deal with any injury, emergency, etc. without me to help them. It could be as simple as the odds of breaking a limb playing, or a serious fall from a bike, and so on, are just a little bit higher when children are playing outside. I want to be nearby for if and when they need me.

 

Of course this would only apply to around age 11 or younger, depending on maturity. HTH

 

Kim in TN (used to be in NV)

[Plucky]

For me, more accidents requiring the ER have happened outside. I want to narrow down the possibility that one of my kids will be severely hurt while I'm gone. I don't leave my kids alone more than 2-3 hours on average anyway.

[Jennifer in MI]

I'm fairly new to my kids being left home alone (my older two are 11 and 10). But, I don't let them play outside when home alone because I'm worried that they'll get hurt and nobody will notice and get them help. My reasoning has nothing to do with stranger abduction (which I don't usually even consider!).

 

We're also new to this neighborhood. So, maybe my views will change as we get to know our neighbors better (but first this darn snow has to melt!!).

[Mama Lynx]

We move often.

 

As such, we do not know our neighbors well. We are probably the only homeschoolers in our neighborhood, and I do not know the neighbors' attitudes toward homeschooling.

 

In short, I have them stay inside when I'm not home more because I do not want to invite curiosity from neighbors I don't know well. If my kids play outside during the day when I'm not home, they will be very conspicuous because they will be the only kids out there. My main fear is that someone would stop to question them, find out that there are no parents home, and, as well-meaning, concerned neighbors, start an investigation into our family.

 

Joanne, in your situation, where you've lived there for many years and know your neighbors, I would feel differently.

[pixelroper]

I live pretty remote, b/c of this we have more registered s*x offenders than some large towns. Add to this no neighbors to see anything amiss, bears & cougars, hunters wandering around during hunting season. Its better to just stay inside. DD isn't old enough to stay home alone yet, I ask the babysitters to just stay in.

[Doran]

While it could be a misconception, I am of the opinion that there are fewer unknown risks INSIDE the house than outside of it.

 

Inside, it's all pretty basic. Outside, the need for more decision making comes into play. Should I go over to Johnny Dynamo's house? Should Johnny come and play with me? What if Johnny needs to come inside? What if Johnny gets hurt? What if Johnny's new friend is a bully? What if the new neighbor is creepy?

 

You get the idea.

 

 

Doran

[Donna]

I will leave my boys home alone together. I won't leave one without the other and I don't leave my 5yo home alone with them (though I was babysitting a newborn at the age of my oldest son but that was another time). My boys must stay in the house with the doors locked and are not allowed to answer the phone (unless it is me or their Dad) or the door.

 

They are not allowed outside either. Maybe it is a misconception that they are safer inside than out but inside they are locked in and have a chance to get to a phone for help if someone attempts to get in. Outside, people can see them and there are too many other ways they can be injured. I live in a relatively safe neighborhood with neighbors on both sides in law enforcement. We have older neighbors across the street who are usually at home. But even so, I guess I am just overprotective. I would rather be safe than sorry where my children are concerned.

[PariSarah]

. . . I would be worried about the "compounding" problem: if my kids were home with no supervision, playing with the next door neighbor's kids, who are home without supervision, and the down-the-street kids come over, also unsupervised, you have ten kids there, none of whom are immediately answerable to an adult, and all of whom are twenty feet or less away from about ten sources of serious physical danger: roads, community pool, homes with firearms, etc., etc., and some of whom are old enough and self-destructive enough that it would almost certainly occur to them to do something stupid.

 

Stranger abduction just isn't the first thing in my mind when I think of ds playing outside without an occasional parental glance. It's things like kids deciding to play with matches next to our neighbor's gas pack. (Actually happened. Don't ask how long that punishment lasted.)

 

Then again, our neighborhood is more . . . uh, exciting? than some, so I do have more concern about illegal goings-on than perhaps you have to in your neighborhood.

 

I trust my 10yods to stay home alone for short periods of time. I trust that, although he could manage to kill himself while I'm gone, he probably won't. He'd have to work pretty hard at it in our house, actually. But I don't have the same confidence that he'd make good decisions around his neighborhood friends, some of whom I don't even allow him to play with unless I'm in visual range, and I don't trust what might happen in other people's houses should he decide to go in one unauthorized.

[Janet in WA]

 

. . . I would be worried about the "compounding" problem: if my kids were home with no supervision, playing with the next door neighbor's kids, who are home without supervision, and the down-the-street kids come over, also unsupervised, you have ten kids there, none of whom are immediately answerable to an adult, and all of whom are twenty feet or less away from about ten sources of serious physical danger: roads, community pool, homes with firearms, etc., etc., and some of whom are old enough and self-destructive enough that it would almost certainly occur to them to do something stupid.

That was our thinking too. When our sons were outside, it never failed to attract neighbor children. And it's tough for children to tell other children to "Go home -- my parents aren't home so you can't be here". Better to keep them inside and minimize the chances for problems.

[Danestress]

And by "anyone" I mean other kids.

 

When I leave mine (which I've just started to do for very short periods) they aren't to answer the door or the phone unless it's my cell phone, their brother's or their father's. If a neighborhood kid comes to the door, the kid wouldn't never know mine are home because they aren't allowed to answer it to go see who it is.

 

But if they were playing outside, I feel it makes other kids come over and puts mine in the difficult position of telling them they can't stay.

 

So for me, it's better if they are inside, away from other children. Of course I make sure that a neighbor is home before I leave, though. I want ADULTS to be available, but I don't want the distraction and responsibility of additional kids.

[Joanne]

Ok, injury I understand. And 10 - 11 year olds as the oldest, home alone for short times......that makes sense.

 

I guess I'd rather my kids play outside with friends than the stuff they do when inside unsupervised: tv, computer, phone, etc.

[Danestress]

Ok, injury I understand. And 10 - 11 year olds as the oldest, home alone for short times......that makes sense.

 

I guess I'd rather my kids play outside with friends than the stuff they do when inside unsupervised: tv, computer, phone, etc.

 

Well, why not just tell them that they can't do those things if you don't want them to?

[Joanne]

Well, why not just tell them that they can't do those things if you don't want them to?

 

I wasn't complaining about the amount of time *my* kids spend on screens and phones.:confused: It's not like I say "I'm going out. Go outside and play". But given the opportunity to play outside, with known and cherished kids and playing creatively, I'd rather they do that...than the default stuff usually done while inside without adults for a longish period. I can't imagine saying "no screens" to children of mine's ages and keeping them inside when I go out. It would be an arbitrary decision on my part, hard to administer in remote and age inappropriate.

[Nestof3]

I think the difference is that being outside makes them susceptible to those outside. I know elderly who are concerned that people know they live alone for fear that it makes them more vulnerable.

[momofkhm]

For the abduction reason. Even when we are home, dh or I have to be available. For us that means one of us has to be awake. The front yard is one thing. Mostly it's playing in the street, but it's a cul-de-sac and most of the neighbors are parents themselves and come in slowly so that's not the problem. But we have a greenway running behind our house. (Greenway is a public trail, usually through the woods.) So even though I know the neighbors and believe them to be trustful and watchful for the children outside playing, the unknown people walking the trail behind the house just doesn't bode well.

[Tracey in TX]

I'm a very laid back parent, but do not allow DCs to play outside while I'm not at home. Even when our exchange student is 'watching' the kids, they're not allowed outside (yet a good sitter can take them swimming). Cars drive very fast (even on cul-de-sac street?), and we've had an attempted abduction in our neighborhood. Add to the list climbing tress, skateboarding, etc., and it's an ER visit waiting to happen.

The kiddos can play in the fenced backyard only, but opt to stay inside b/c it's just not 'cool'. LOL

[Danestress]

I guess I'm not really sure what you are saying and apparently I said something confusing, so maybe we are crossing wires, lol.

 

I never thought it was age inappropriate to restrict computer and tv time. My son didn't have totally unrestricted access to a computer until he moved out and bought his own. Long before that, he could drive off in his car though! So I guess that's just different ways of looking at things. My kids don't really watch a lot of tv or play on the computer. I'm okay with the ways that they entertain themselves inside - mostly reading, origami, art, and lots of messy but otherwise harmless craft. I just would not be comfortable if they had friends over when I am not home - even if it was outside.

 

But honestly, I have great neighbors, and nine times out of ten, if I want to run an errand they are playing outside with friends - just in the vicinity of the other kid's home, whose Mom has agreed to sort of be the parent on duty. And of course I return the favor.

[Audrey]

Not having read what the others have said... here there is a law stating you cannot leave your child under 12 unattended (by an adult). Besides that law, and in the absence thereof elsewhere, I wouldn't question another parent's rules for their children while home alone. I don't know their particular child, nor their particular neighbourhood, nor any other circumstances that could affect their decision.

 

FWIW, I don't believe a parent can be too cautious. (and I not talking about any weird anomalies or random anecdotes here) If a parent feels they have reason to keep their kids inside, then I would never be so presumptuous as to question their gut instincts. I know I'd be pretty offended if they presumed to question mine.

[Joanne]

I just would not be comfortable if they had friends over when I am not home - even if it was outside.

 

Well, I agree with the friends "in" while we are gone. That's a definite no.

 

FWIW, I don't believe a parent can be too cautious.

 

I believe that parents *can* be too cautious and it can be a detriment.

 

 

(and I not talking about any weird anomalies or random anecdotes here) If a parent feels they have reason to keep their kids inside, then I would never be so presumptuous as to question their gut instincts. I know I'd be pretty offended if they presumed to question mine.

 

I asked for explanations; not justifications. I do not think that keeping kids inside is necessarily overprotective, I just didn't make the same decision.

[Joanne]

I never thought it was age inappropriate to restrict computer and tv time. My son didn't have totally unrestricted access to a computer until he moved out and bought his own. Long before that, he could drive off in his car though! So I guess that's just different ways of looking at things. My kids don't really watch a lot of tv or play on the computer. I'm okay with the ways that they entertain themselves inside - mostly reading, origami, art, and lots of messy but otherwise harmless craft.

 

Hm. I'm thinking about this. It's been years since I've had to restrict screen time to a number. We've had policies around it that the kids know and understand.

 

1) All chores and school work must be done - and with respectful behavior. Since I can control heart or attitude, the *behavior* has to be respectful.

 

2) If someone is at the door wanting to play, and it's acceptable weather, you go play.

 

3) Getting off, turning it off, hanging up is done quickly and respectfully at my request or the next time won't happen.

 

They do various things while inside, from reading, crafts, legos, creative kid games to a range of screen related fun. I'm not against media and technology for my kids and I do not have one that is prone to addictive like behavior with it. (If I did, that child would do none).

 

But if they are inside and I am gone? They can be on the computer, watch tv, etc as long as school and chores are done. (Of course, I'm not gone if school isn't done anyway.)

[Peek a Boo]

I'm in the "limiting variables" camp :)

 

But I also have certain rules that must be followed if they are left at home alone: no cooking, no computer, no phone [except for certain phone numbers as mentioned already]. There are plenty of real-world scenarios where one set of Rules will be different depending on the situation, even if the location is the same.

 

The reason is because i want them focussed on other activities, for the exact reasons you mentioned: better stuff to do. Now if a kiddo is being left alone cuz he feels sick and I don't wanna drag him out? TV is fine.

 

If they are ready to be left home alone, they have proved to be ready to accept the limitations that i set forth. They have proved that they can be obedient [like you mentioned in your #1 above: Since I can['t?] control heart or attitude, the *behavior* has to be respectful.]. They may read, play w/ legos, k'nex, toys; work on a project, something constructive. I do expect to see/hear about what they have been working on when i get back. They are usually fairly excited to show me, lol. With increased maturity and freedoms comes increased expectations and responsibility :)

[Audrey]

With increased maturity and freedoms comes increased expectations and responsibility :)

 

:iagree: Beautifully said, and I would bet you're absolutely the best judge of your child's maturity.

[Peek a Boo]

One more:

 

you mentioned "for a longish period."

 

I think i would limit my time gone to however long they can remain obedient under my rules. If they simply can't find a way to constructively be obedient for any longer than "X" number of hours, then i'd say they CAN't be trusted to be obedient any longer than that, inside OR outside. They need to be obedient no matter where they might be playing.

[HSMom2One]

We live in a small rural area where we feel it is safe for our dd to walk the dog around the immediate area and visit with a friend down the street, but in another community we lived in this would not have been allowed, nor will it be when we move to a larger community 12 miles from here later on this summer. As I'm typing this, I'm asking myself, "How can anyone know this for sure? There are risky situations in every single community -big or small."

 

I'm older than a lot of you here and I was married to a policeman for a decade, so I have maybe a different perspective. Sometimes I wish I didn't know the things that I do about kids being left alone, playing outside, etc. As I parent again a second time around, this is such a challenging area. The world has changed so much in twenty years!

 

Blessings,

Lucinda

[RoughCollie]

I leave my boys alone at home for short periods of time (1-1.5 hours) once in awhile, and I don't let them go outside. The reason is that no one is out there except complete strangers who come into our neighborhood to make deliveries or do landscaping or construction work.

 

I don't want my kids outside with them because so many of those workers have criminal records and I am not taking chances with my kids. Our house is secure, DH & I are always within 1.5 miles of it, and we have a big dog. We live in a small, suburban town which is fairly safe.

 

The odds are extremely remote that a child will be abducted by a stranger. I do realize that. I am perhaps more cautious than I would otherwise be because I was kidnapped when I was a teenager.

 

The neighbors are all at work and the kids are at school during the day. After school, they go to activities and do homework. I rarely see kids outside playing unless they are much younger than mine.

 

During weekends, the neighbors are mostly inside their houses or zooming by in their cars. Their kids go to a bunch of activities (sports, ballet, and the like) and they aren't home much either. They actually have appointment books so they can schedule play dates (or whatever the kids call it age 12).

 

On the rare occasion when a neighborhood boy may drop by, I will give the boys permission to go to his house to play because I know his parents will be home and will make sure nothing happens to my boys. The parents are friends of ours and we have that agreement.

 

Also, wherever my boys go, we have the buddy system in place. If all three are at home and the neighbor boy comes over, all three must go to his house because of this, or no one can go. I don't leave DD at home because she wants to go with me and because she will cause trouble with the boys and everyone will be in an uproar when I get home.

[Carol in Cal.]

If DD did so, it would attract negative attention. It's really too bad. She is old enough and responsible enough, for instance, to walk by herself for a few blocks to a store or ice cream place. But she would really stand out if she did this, and I think that she would look excessively vulnerable and become a target.

 

Our neighborhood is decent, but it is still urban. The gang problems locally would not impinge directly on DD, but she could get caught in the crossfire.

 

I have let her stay home alone very rarely, and not during night hours, and only when it appeared that someone was in the house (ie if one of our cars was still parked visibly.) Break ins are not common around here, but they do happen; and if she were home and it was broken into, that would be horrible beyond contemplation.

 

We had a homeless guy camp in our garage (found unmistakable evidence, and someone saw him when we were out). We also had some items stolen from it around the same time--our bikes, our camp stove, a sleeping bag, maybe some other stuff that we can't find. We never caught him, and I have this uneasy feeling that the house is watched, to some extent, and has been made attractive to him and others because of what they found there. It is just not safe enough to leave DD, and I've stopped doing that. Many of the singular homeless locally are mentally ill and very unpredictable.

 

I'm sorry that we live here, in some ways.

[LizzyBee]

I don't live in a "bad" neighborhood, and most people would not say that I'm an overprotective parent. But abduction is the primary reason I don't let my kids play outside when dh and I aren't home. I understand that sex offenders are not lurking around every corner. But they do look for opportunities, and I don't see any reason to hand them one. There have been several attempted abductions in the past year in upscale neighborhoods not far from us. And a little further away and maybe 2 years ago, a teen was raped and murdered by a neighbor who had been watching and waiting for an opportunity when the teen was alone.

 

I don't worry so much about accidents, because they can happen inside or out and my kids know how to call 911.

 

On particularly nice days, I will tell my kids they can play in the back yard even if we're not home, but under no circumstances are they to go out front.

[Kelli in TN]

My kids do not stay home alone before the age of 12. When they stay home alone they must stay in the house with all doors locked at all times and they may not cook.

 

(The no cooking rule came from an incident involving a 13 year old, a music video, a Boca burger, some frozen french fries and a pan of canola oil. And while I love the big new kitchen I got out of the deal, I never want to come home to a yard full of firetrucks again as long as I live.)

 

Unlike many posters, I do consider stranger abduction to be a very real threat. I do not cause my children to live in fear of strangers, but neither do I want to put them out in the yard unattended while I am at the grocery store. They can go out as soon as I get home, after they unload the groceries for me, of course.:D

[Staci in MO]

(The no cooking rule came from an incident involving a 13 year old, a music video, a Boca burger, some frozen french fries and a pan of canola oil. And while I love the big new kitchen I got out of the deal, I never want to come home to a yard full of firetrucks again as long as I live.)

 

That just might be the quote of the day! :lol: