S/o hotel room alone

[bettyandbob]

Some people think I am specifically saying if you don't let your child stay in a hotel room then....

Or I am saying you have to have your child experience everything....

 

No, I think having a range of independent experiences that allows one to build an assessment of how to deal with new unpredictable things once one leaves home. This was not meant to point to a specific thing, but there seems to be a lot of threads where many posters say no, never do that. It's not one specific thing. And so I wonder if you've never navigated anything what tool box do you have to assess when a situation is not quite right. 

[LibraryLover]

Some people think I am specifically saying if you don't let your child stay in a hotel room then....

Or I am saying you have to have your child experience everything....

 

No, I think having a range of independent experiences that allows one to build an assessment of how to deal with new unpredictable things once one leaves home. This was not meant to point to a specific thing, but there seems to be a lot of threads where many posters say no, never do that. It's not one specific thing. And so I wonder if you've never navigated anything what tool box do you have to assess when a situation is not quite right. 

 

The no, never is really what surprised me, and why I even responded.

[SKL]

This is my reward for putting up with dh's travel. Hotel points, and rooms we don't pay for ourselves.  I've finally learned to roll with it.  As a family we are frugal, but if the company is booking a hotel for a conference or business?  I make it work for me. ;) lol

 

I hardly saw anything in Madrid, but the room service coffee was awesome.  ;)

 

[ThisIsTheDay]

That sounds a lot like the old, "But how will they learn to stand in line if they homeschool?" question.

 

Because two families can raise their kids differently and still both have well adjusted adults.  Because the freedoms some might give their kids at 12 have absolutely nothing to do with the freedoms I might give my kid at 16.  Because there is a whole lot more to raising independent adults than just giving kids more independence.  Because my idea of letting my kids go may be completely different than your idea. 

 

And I've seen an awful lot of kids whose parents think they are independent rely quite a bit more on their parents than my once sheltered kids need to rely on me.

 

[Word Nerd]

My kids learned to drive when they were about 3, so they could drive while Dad tossed mineral or cake or whatever out of the back of the pickup.

 

Your kids were driving a pickup at 3?

[Catwoman]

That sounds a lot like the old, "But how will they learn to stand in line if they homeschool?" question.

 

Because two families can raise their kids differently and still both have well adjusted adults. Because the freedoms some might give their kids at 12 have absolutely nothing to do with the freedoms I might give my kid at 16. Because there is a whole lot more to raising independent adults than just giving kids more independence. Because my idea of letting my kids go may be completely different than your idea.

:iagree:

 

And let's face it, for every kid who has lived in several environments, is well-traveled, and whose parents can afford to give him all sorts of horizon-expanding experiences, there are plenty of kids who will rarely ever leave their small home town until they go off to college... and yet in a very short time, I'd be willing to bet that we couldn't tell most of those kids apart from each other.

 

Most of the things we do to get along in life aren't rocket science. Kids are clever and adaptable, and most of them can manage just fine when they grow up and move out of the house, whether or not they had lots of independence and experience. They pick things up as they go along, and hopefully they learn from their mistakes. I don't think it means anything one way or the other if one kid was allowed to walk to the store when he was 8, while another kid wasn't permitted to do it until he was 14. I think it all balances out in the end.

[LucyStoner]

Probably the greatest challenge of my parenting life is striking the right balance between enough nurture and hands on care and enough space to figure stuff out on their own. 

 

I grew up with adult sized freedoms, but also burdened with adult sized responsibilities.  I don't want that for my kids.  I won't have that for my kids.  But I also want them to be able to grow and explore and learn without mama and papa breathing down their necks. 

 

I do think that there is a middle ground and that most of the parents I know are navigating the middle and not an extreme. 

[Catwoman]

I do think that there is a middle ground and that most of the parents I know are navigating the middle and not an extreme.

Same here.

 

I don't know anyone IRL who is extreme. Some parents are kind of protective and others allow a little more freedom, but I don't see anyone who fits neatly into the black-and-white definitions of being a helicopter parent or a free-range parent. Everyone seems to be somewhere in the middle, and they make decisions based on individual circumstances.

[Joker]

We were very over protective the first several years. I was just really scared of all that could hurt them. That period of time hasn't held them back any. I didn't loosen up on oldest until she was about 11/12, and even then it wasn't what I would call free range. Yet, I let her travel to DC with her class several weeks ago, stay in a hotel room with other 13/14 year old girls, and wander around DC. They had free time at many places including the National Mall where the only rule given to them by chaperones was to stay in groups of three. She had a great time and made it home safely.

 

Last year, I let her go on a Disney class trip and she actually was left behind once. She navigated where to go and found her way back to her group. She was okay and it gave her sooooo much confidence.

 

I don't regret being so overprotective those first several years. I'm also happy with where we are now and I still worry like crazy - I just control it better.

[Erin]

Your kids were driving a pickup at 3?

 

Yep.  Actually, it was mostly just steering.   ;)  Trap would put it in 4WD granny low which idles along at about 2mph.   He walks faster than it would drive, so if a kid had trouble, he'd just jump out of the back and walk up to the driver's door and help out.  

It was so fun to go out later in the day and see the cows lined up along the hillside where they'd been fed.  The "line" jogged all over the place.  lol

 

The kids didn't actually put a vehicle in gear on their own and truly drive until about 8 though, because they didn't have the length of leg to push in the clutch...

[Χά�ων]

Yep.  Actually, it was mostly just steering.   ;)  Trap would put it in 4WD granny low which idles along at about 2mph.   He walks faster than it would drive, so if a kid had trouble, he'd just jump out of the back and walk up to the driver's door and help out.  

It was so fun to go out later in the day and see the cows lined up along the hillside where they'd been fed.  The "line" jogged all over the place.  lol

 

The kids didn't actually put a vehicle in gear on their own and truly drive until about 8 though, because they didn't have the length of leg to push in the clutch...

I bet they had a blast helping out! I can imagine DS at that age being over the moon at the thought that he could 'drive' the truck.

[Word Nerd]

I think I was 10 or 11 when I drove the pickup in a field while helping Dad.

[PinkyandtheBrains.]

By 10 I was riding the city bus alone to the mall and the movies.

 

We live rurally so that isn't an option for my boys, but it doesn't seem all that strange to me.

[Barb_]

Kids learn what they live. Sure, a young adult can scramble and learn laundry skills, time management, budgeting, emergency management, division of labor, assertiveness, self control, study skills, prioritization of tasks, campus navigation, rudimentary cooking and cleaning skills, as well as the ability to assess risks appropriately and develop the self confidence to push past their comfort zones...but, well. That's a pretty tall order for an 18yo. Why make it harder on them than it needs to be? The learning curve when starting out on one's own for the first time is pretty steep. It makes sense that those who have been on training wheels for most of their teens will find the transition smoother than those who are suddenly thrust into many or most of these areas at graduation. The more soft skills they have already mastered at home in a lower stakes environment, the better chance they have of not crashing and burning. Because they do. If you only saw how many bright, seemingly capable kids vanish after the first couple of semesters, your heart would break. Most don't just magically figure it out. They are demoralized, confused, overwhelmed and in over their heads.

[Barb_]

:iagree:

 

And let's face it, for every kid who has lived in several environments, is well-traveled, and whose parents can afford to give him all sorts of horizon-expanding experiences, there are plenty of kids who will rarely ever leave their small home town until they go off to college... and yet in a very short time, I'd be willing to bet that we couldn't tell most of those kids apart from each other.

Unfortunately this is a bet you'd lose. While a new graduate with fewer life experiences isn't necessarily doomed, he is put at a serious disadvantage. By junior year, the gap will have begun to close if he's still enrolled. Chances are better than even at a lot of schools that he is not. Then when students are ejected from the womb again at graduation, many wind up back home jobless precisely because the world is frightening and unwelcoming to those who've made it through 4 years of college despite the lack of soft skills they should have already possessed when they arrived on campus. Life is just harder for most of these kids. It really is.

 

Most of the things we do to get along in life aren't rocket science. Kids are clever and adaptable, and most of them can manage just fine when they grow up and move out of the house, whether or not they had lots of independence and experience. They pick things up as they go along, and hopefully they learn from their mistakes. I don't think it means anything one way or the other if one kid was allowed to walk to the store when he was 8, while another kid wasn't permitted to do it until he was 14. I think it all balances out in the end.

This is a little like saying weather is the same thing as climate. The age at which a child walks to the store doesn't amount to much in isolation. Any individual example on its own isn't going to seem like it means much at all unless an aggregation of examples shows a pattern of delayed independence. The habit, or parenting climate so to speak, of waiting overly long to encourage new skills and independence is damaging to an emerging adulthood--kindly meant, but damaging all the same.

[Catwoman]

Unfortunately this is a bet you'd lose. While a new graduate with fewer life experiences isn't necessarily doomed, he is put at a serious disadvantage. By junior year, the gap will have begun to close if he's still enrolled. Chances are better than even at a lot of schools that he is not. Then when students are ejected from the womb again at graduation, many wind up back home precisely because the world is frightening and unwelcoming to those who made it through 4 years of college despite the lack of soft skills they should have already possessed when they arrived on campus. Life is just harder for most of these kids. It really is.

 

 

This is a little like saying weather is the same thing as climate. The age at which a child walks to the store doesn't amount to much in isolation. Any individual example on its own isn't going to seem like it means much at all unless an aggregation of examples shows a pattern of delayed independence. The habit of waiting overly long to encourage new skills and independence is damaging to an emerging adulthood.

I'm sorry, but I simply don't agree with you. I think we will have to agree to disagree on this issue, as our viewpoints are too far apart.

 

No big deal. :)

[Joker]

I've been thinking about this whole thing a lot lately. One thing I find interesting is that in my life my parents were very free range with us while younger. We were walking and riding our bikes all over the neighborhoods we lived in while in elementary school and most of middle school. Then, they actually became strict. We were watched closer and had more rules. My parents always knew where we were in high school - even if we lied. They had some serious high school teenage radar. We still ended up just fine. Three of us went off to college at 18 and never returned to live at home (we all manage to keep in touch now and are close, though). I didn't go to college but had my own apartment and then packed up and moved to CA all by myself at 19. We weren't hindered at all by their protectiveness during those years.

 

It just seems really interesting to me because I have been more protective in the early years while allowing much more freedom as my dds age. It's been the opposite so it will be interesting to see how it plays out. My gut tells me the end result will be the same.

[SKL]

I remember being very independent as a kid and then drawing closer to my mom around age 13.  That's when I'd tell her all my mental ramblings and felt she was really listening and mostly not judging. 

 

I don't think my parents got stricter in my teen years, but I was very introverted, so I never wanted to do a lot of things parents of teens worry about.  I would be gone most of the afternoon/evening, but usually by myself or with siblings.

 

Some things happened in my childhood which were unfortunate.  Not sure I would blame them on being free range, because they involved family friends in the neighborhood - people my parents knew, not the type of people helicopter parents keep their kids away from.  Anyway, those incidents don't make me fear free range, but hopefully make me a bit smarter about what to teach my kids and what to notice in their comings and goings.

[Laura Corin]

By 10 I was riding the city bus alone to the mall and the movies.

 

We live rurally so that isn't an option for my boys, but it doesn't seem all that strange to me.

 

At 11 I was taking two public buses each way to get to school each day.  And in the UK, the statistics for experience of crime (not police statistics, which can be manipulated, but surveys of individuals' experience of crime) have been dropping for at least the last thirty years.  So an eleven year old crossing a large city by public bus, and waiting at dark bus stops on winter's nights as I did, is safer than I was.  

 

I'm not adventurous by nature.  I'm really glad I had a lot of independence as a child.  Without it, I certainly would not have boarded that plane to China and a whole new life.  

 

Each parent will make his or her own decisions - and that's fine - but I do think that offering a variety of opportunities for getting into messes, coping, and carrying on is very valuable.  I am much more confident about Calvin's ability to cope at university after he did some of the university visits on his own, including having his suitcase stolen off a train and having to deal with the police.

 

L

[kroe1]

I am getting tickled about the mass transit examples. And I am, for sure, a helicopter parent. But the one time I have even thought of taking mass transit, other than airplanes, was in Washington DC. DD and I were on an Adventures By Disney trip and had the afternoon off. We had decided to go exploring on the Metro. When we saw the crowds, we decided it would be too much of a pain so we hired a driver instead. The train we were about to get on crashed injuring several people.

 

DD13 never gets left alone. DH works from home and we have elderly living with us. She has no regularly scheduled chores either. Yet, she can pay the family bills when needed, cook dinner when parents are working, give her grandmother injections through a PICC line, arrange for a driver to her classes, and actually sing a solo in front of 800 people.

 

Like her brother before her, she will walk out of my wallet at age 25ish or so and have the first episode where mommy isn't directing her every move. She will do just fine. She also plans to be a physician like most of her family. And I doubt, like most of her family, she will ever ride mass transit, except airplanes. It will also be the first time she has to clean her own toilet.

[creekland]

The older I get, the more this seems urban/rural...  

 

Rural kids are expected to be more mature(? reliable?) at a younger age.  That is, they are expected to do a lot of chores and pull their weight at a young age.  Given proximately to town/school/work, they are driving at younger ages.  And so on.

 

My kids learned to drive when they were about 3, so they could drive while Dad tossed mineral or cake or whatever out of the back of the pickup.  Buck has been working for friends and neighbors since he was about 10.  At that age it was fixing fence here, or helping move cows or some such every few months.  Now that he's 14, it's driving a payloader, trailing cows a number of miles, or mowing hay every week or two.  Bean is happier doing Mom-stuff like babysitting or keeping house, but she can also go out and hook up the stock trailer if needs be or feed livestock, etc, etc.

 

 

I went to college at a small, rural school and I vividly remember noticing the difference.  

Those of us who'd grown up in town tended to be a little less sure of ourselves and our capabilities.  The farm and ranch kids were usually quite independent and confident.   It equalled out as time went by so by senior year it was hard to tell anymore, who was who.  But it was very obvious as freshmen...

 

 

BTW, I realize those of you who don't have a significant, rural presence in your area for comparison won't really understand what I'm talking about.  

 

:iagree:   I have seen the same thing.  It's WHY hubby and I left the city (suburban area within a city - not the urban center) and chose a rural spot to live when oldest was 4.  We were both raised rural, both went to college, both saw the same things - then had oodles of opportunities available to us (due to his job) and chose a nice southern city to live in as young marrieds.  Once we had kids though, our parenting genes took over, and we wanted them raised the way we had been raised.  We have NO regrets at all.  There is a huge difference and I think we all need to make choices based upon which factors are appealing to each of us.

 

As always, I don't particularly think one path is right and another wrong.  They are different - and I have my preferences just like we all do.

 

home alone at 9, driving at 7 or even 10, dropping off unsupervised etc around here is illegal in some cases and grounds for CPS involvement in nearly all.  A child left unsupervised at a major event would result in police being called, same with driving at that age.  being left home alone is more a grey area, which would result in an investigation but nothing further unless there was other circumstances.  Intentionally putting your kid at risk is much different than teaching them life skills, it is purely negligent.

 

Well, no, this is not always illegal.  Home alone at 9 is not (either here or where I grew up). At 5 (kindergarten) someone has to be there to get the kid off the bus, but at any age thereafter, it is not needed.   Driving at any age is not AS LONG AS one is driving on their own property - easy to do on a farm.  Pretty much all farm kids drive well before they get their learner's permit to drive on roads.  I know I started at age 8 - as soon as I could reach the pedals.  I wasn't driving daily, but when the adults were working (on fence or whatever) it was easier to let the youngsters drive.  Our kids all have driven on our property before getting permits too.

 

Again, it's a rural thing.  If one lives on one acre or less, it's tough to drive on your own property...

 

:iagree:

 

And let's face it, for every kid who has lived in several environments, is well-traveled, and whose parents can afford to give him all sorts of horizon-expanding experiences, there are plenty of kids who will rarely ever leave their small home town until they go off to college... and yet in a very short time, I'd be willing to bet that we couldn't tell most of those kids apart from each other.

 

 

IF they do go off to college, some catch up.  Many do not.  Many return home from college (few traveled kids do IME).  Many in my circle of friends WISH they had done more younger and are trying to do so for their kids.  Others are content sticking around home and wonder why anyone would ever travel more than an hour from home (aside, maybe, from a trip to the beach).

 

The lifestyles are different.  All will learn how to support themselves, feed themselves, and anything else important for living.  On that I agree.  But the paths are totally different.  The well-traveled individual tends to be far more confident in "unknown" situations.  I see this even among the high school students at school.  There is much to be learned from travel and/or activities and it just can't be duplicated by staying home doing the same thing over and over.

 

Neither path is "right," but they are different.  I believe there's a genetic component vs entirely a learned deal, esp since some do opt to switch categories when they get to make the decisions (ie reach adulthood).  But of those I know in our "travel" circle (those we meet camping or hiking or scuba, etc) who didn't grow up doing things seem to always wish they had so they wouldn't have so much of a learning curve for catching up.

 

Our kids have been brought up traveling since birth.  The older two in college have both ended up being "in charge" helping others figure out how to go places and do things outside of their comfort zone (even taking local buses).  They aren't afraid to go somewhere new AND figure out how to make it happen.  Not so with those who haven't had the opportunities to make such decisions before.  They might WANT to go, but often they have no idea how to go about making it happen.

[creekland]

I am getting tickled about the mass transit examples. And I am, for sure, a helicopter parent. But the one time I have even thought of taking mass transit, other than airplanes, was in Washington DC. DD and I were on an Adventures By Disney trip and had the afternoon off. We had decided to go exploring on the Metro. When we saw the crowds, we decided it would be too much of a pain so we hired a driver instead. The train we were about to get on crashed injuring several people.

 

...

 

And I doubt, like most of her family, she will ever ride mass transit, except airplanes. It will also be the first time she has to clean her own toilet.

 

Seriously?  You've given up on mass transit due to one "almost" accident?  Have you seen how many car accidents happen daily?

 

When I was 14 or 15 my grandfather, in Florida, passed away and my family needed to get to the funeral.  We almost made it on the plane that crashed into the Potomac in DC killing almost everyone.  The only reason we weren't on that plane was because we just missed making a flight to get to DC for it.

 

I often give thanks for that miss (and wonder if I'd have lived or died - probably died), but there's NO WAY I'd ever let it stop me from getting on another plane.  We got on two later that day - heading to Florida.  The first plane flew into a thunderstorm at Tampa - very turbulent - many were using barf bags - and we lost an engine.  The pilot came on telling us he was hoping he could get it restarted...  We survived, and hopped on another one shortly afterward to continue heading south.  No issues on that one...

 

I'd rather "live" and die young than grow into old age but "miss" life.

 

There are reasonable things to do (seatbelts, healthier eating, stop signs, etc), but there are also unreasonable fears IMO.

 

[creekland]

FWIW, humans aren't the only ones who have differing parenting ideas.

 

We've raised ponies for the past several years and have had several different broodmares.  They are all different too. 

 

On one extreme we had one who was perfectly happy letting us babysit and sometimes had no clue where her offspring was.  She only cared when her milk bag started to get uncomfortable - then she'd whinny to find the youngun.  It was cute.  She cared more at weaning (when she couldn't get her pressure relieved) than during her time with the foal.

 

On the other extreme we had one who MADE her baby stay close by for a good 3 months or so (weaning is common at 4 - 6 months with ponies).  She'd get really mad if ANYONE came between her and her baby, so even humans had to be careful - esp in the beginning.  Other ponies daring to do it were punished.

 

Most were somewhere in between.

 

Another FWIW, the foals that grow up with more independent mamas are more independent themselves and make better riding ponies due to NOT being herd bound (needing a buddy with them).  It takes far more work to get the other foals to be comfortable by themselves and some never truly get there.  Genetics or environment?  I bet it's a combo of both.

[texasmama]

Interesting discussion.

 

I tend to be fairly protective.  However, my 11 year old goes every Tuesday to the Humane Society to volunteer while I am at work.  He started when he was 10.  He is dropped off by my dad.  The shelter employee who provides loose supervision while he is there for several hours is a lady I have never met.  I know the shelter director, who suggested the volunteer opportunity, but she is not there on Tuesdays.  The first day he volunteered, I wrote a note to this lady thanking her for the opportunity for my son to volunteer and giving emergency numbers.  Otherwise, I trust my son to be able to communicate with the adults there and/or call a parent if he has a problem.  He is very loosely supervised while there.  He does not leave the building, but mostly he wanders through the shelter playing with the animals.

 

He loves doing this.  Even though this is a first time experience of this sort for me as a mom, and I had to process through my thoughts and feelings about it, I deemed it a very low risk activity for a lot of reasons.  So I don't have any hard and fast rules, I suppose.  I take each child at each stage with each opportunity, evaluate the opportunity on its own merits and prepare the child.

[ThisIsTheDay]

I bet they had a blast helping out! I can imagine DS at that age being over the moon at the thought that he could 'drive' the truck.

 

Yeah, when I think of how much my son enjoyed driving his sister's hand-me-down pink Barbie car, I can just imagine how much he would have loved this!!!

 

 

 

Some people think I am specifically saying if you don't let your child stay in a hotel room then....

Or I am saying you have to have your child experience everything....

 

No, I think having a range of independent experiences that allows one to build an assessment of how to deal with new unpredictable things once one leaves home. This was not meant to point to a specific thing, but there seems to be a lot of threads where many posters say no, never do that. It's not one specific thing. And so I wonder if you've never navigated anything what tool box do you have to assess when a situation is not quite right. 

 

In many ways, my kids are/have been sheltered.  On these boards, I'd say no to virtually all sleepovers, no to dropping 15 year olds off at the mall, no to PG-13 movies when they were younger, no to week-long summer camp for 12 year olds, no to 10 year olds staying home alone, no to TVs in their bedrooms, etc.

 

Just because we are pretty restrictive though doesn't mean it's across the board.  I think you (OP) may be seeing many people say no to things, but they do not say no to every.single.thing. 

 

At 16, my dd began attending TeenPact, a four day camp, where she knew no one the first year, and she also went to their ~8 day camp with 500 others, not knowing who she might know until she got there.  She also went on a 10 day missions trip to South America with a group of 30--when we only casually knew one man on the trip (and his daughter).  The group also picked up another 10 people in Lima who acted as translators.

 

A year later, she ended up stranded in Chicago airport with her little brother.  We are not seasoned travelers, but with minimal coaching and a lot of encouragement-by-text, she was able to negotiate a flight just a few hours later (and got first class).  The airline had originally rebooked them six or so hours later, but her patience and persistence paid off.

 

Just because this was specifically mentioned by someone:  Although dd hasn't cleaned toilets at home in ten years, she's off at college this year, and out of the four suitemates, guess who takes the initiative to clean the toilet.

 

Dd says that I push her to do much more independently than almost every other kid she knows. She thinks I overcompensate, because we've hsed, and I don't know how much other parents really do for their kids. (I  was quite shocked by the parents who did all of the speaking for their kids at college orientation, move in day, etc.)

 

Everyone doesn't have to parent the same to grow independent adult children. It's just like homeschooling--you're learning, although you may have taken very different paths to get there, the goal is to have educated children who *know how to learn* by the time you are done.

[Serenade]

The biggest restriction to the growth of our children is the media induced fear given to parents and the reaction of said parents to legislate all fearful things away--along with all rights and freedoms.

 

 

I think it is this, but also parental fear of condemnation from friends and family.  And also the fear of CPS investigations, that I don't think was there in the past.

 

Even if something is legal, if a lot of people look at you with horror when you do it, you're going to stop doing it.  

 

There is one thing I don't get -- I've seen forum threads, here and elsewhere, proclaiming that life is NOT more violent than it used to be 50 years ago.  If it's not, then why all the hyper-fear that was not there in the past? 

[SKL]

I think the hyper-fear is due to too much "coverage" of child abductions on TV.  They blast the same story endlessly until you start thinking this is happening all the time, everywhere.  And they give a lot of air time to extreme (IMO) opinions and judgments about how you can never be too careful and how could you ever forgive yourself if something happened to your child.  And every time a school bus drops off a kid at the wrong stop (and nobody gets hurt), it's a national emergency.

 

The other day, my local news had a lead story from some other state (so I guess it was national headline news).  The big wow:  parents slept in until 10am, leaving their 8yo and 10yo to get their own breakfast ONE time.  Seriously?  What kind of world are we living in?

[Χά�ων]

home alone at 9, driving at 7 or even 10, dropping off unsupervised etc around here is illegal in some cases and grounds for CPS involvement in nearly all.  A child left unsupervised at a major event would result in police being called, same with driving at that age.  being left home alone is more a grey area, which would result in an investigation but nothing further unless there was other circumstances.  Intentionally putting your kid at risk is much different than teaching them life skills, it is purely negligent.

 

How are any of these things putting a child at risk? With that logic youth motorcross should be outlawed because they are driving a motorcylce and it is way more dangerous than learning to operate a vehicle on private property. Other people have given examples of young children learning to drive on their property and have even mentioned that it is not illegal to drive on private property in the many (most? all?) US states. In my county a report of a child being allowed to drive on private land would probably be met with blank stares and a question of why they were actually calling. It is the norm, not the exception.

 

Home alone at 9 is grey area? It's not like he is being left unsupervised for weeks on end with no food to eat. How is that a grey area? 

 

Dropping a child off at a sports event (and picking them up at the end) is not putting a child at risk. It may be out of the comfort zone for many people, but that is not the same as neglecting a child. It's not even blinked at here. First time I did it I parked my car (I was actually shocked that I could even find a parking spot) and walked inside and waited for him. When I walked in I was simply asked if I was picking up my child, I acknowledged and nothing else was said about that and I spent the few minutes while I was waiting for the game to end talking with the police officer who was working the gate. The only reason I was asked is because it is odd for someone to walk in in the last 3 minutes of the game. DS isn't the only child dropped off for games either. Maybe it is a regional thing, but no one blinked or gave a second thought to the fact that a woman in her early 30's was picking up a child from a professional sports event. Oh and he was 9 the first time.

[Pawz4me]

IRL I don't know of anyone who even thinks about CPS, let alone lives in any kind of fear that their parenting decisions will result in involvement by that agency.  I suspect most people I know are only just vaguely aware that CPS even exists.  So their potential involvement having a bearing on parenting decisions? No, I don't see it.

[ThisIsTheDay]

Home alone at 9 is grey area? It's not like he is being left unsupervised for weeks on end with no food to eat. How is that a grey area? 

 

 

 

For starters, in many states, it's illegal.

 

[SKL]

I'm not sure how much impact the fear of CPS involvement has.  I read about it online, but then again, that could just be another fear sensationalized.  I do know that when I left my school-aged kids in the car (not in sun/heat) for 3 minutes to drop off a package at FedEx, someone immediately called the cops, and the cops showed up within those 3 minutes.  When I ranted about it online, other people said they too would have called the cops under the same circumstances.  So while that didn't lead to CPS involvement, I don't know.  I think the social workers in my down-to-earth state are probably down-to-earth, but that may not be the case everywhere.

[Word Nerd]

As I posted in the infamous shopping cart thread, some woman came out of the grocery store and started to freak out when she noticed that my then-baby was in her car seat "unattended" in the car next to hers. I was approximately 20 seconds away returning my cart to the corral, with only an empty parking space or two between my car and me. I actually have made decisions in the past that were stricter than necessary because I was concerned some busybody might report me to CPS for allowing it—and I've read enough threads in this forum to convince me that concern is a valid one. It's never been a constant fear or worry.

[creekland]

For starters, in many states, it's illegal.

 

Which states?  I know it's not in ours (PA) as we checked on things when our kids started school.  Granted, that was many moons ago... At that time it was only required (for our school) that someone be there to pick the kid up from the bus stop.  That someone did not have to be a parent, but did have to be someone the bus driver recognized.  If we had anyone other than a custodial parent pick the student up at school, we had to sign a paper allowing it.  We did not need to sign anything for the bus stop.

 

By first grade kids could walk or ride their bikes home (alone) from the bus stop.  Mine often did unless it was raining.  Then we'd get them.  It's 6/10ths of a mile from the bus stop to our house.

[Χά�ων]

Thankfully, not in mine. And having pulled up the resources I find the age of 14 in Il. to be a bit extreme. I am flummoxed with the 11 and 12 age ranges because that is an age to start babysitting.

For starters, in many states, it's illegal.

 

[SKL]

Another possible reason for the excess care trend is advertising.  "Nothing but the best is good enough for your baby, right?"  With the unspoken underlying message "if you don't care this much, you don't deserve to be a parent."

 

It always intrigues me that when we talk about car seats, the topic of Sweden's norm always comes up.  The maximum becomes the ideal.  Why?

 

And the idea of different strokes for different folks apparently doesn't apply to certain classes of parenting decisions.

[Χά�ων]

Another possible reason for the excess care trend is advertising.  "Nothing but the best is good enough for your baby, right?"  With the unspoken underlying message "if you don't care this much, you don't deserve to be a parent."

 

It always intrigues me that when we talk about car seats, the topic of Sweden's norm always comes up.  The maximum becomes the ideal.  Why?

 

And the idea of different strokes for different folks apparently doesn't apply to certain classes of parenting decisions.

Wait, you are trying to compare car seat safety to this thread?

[Χά�ων]

Only 4 states have laws about ages for home alone. An additional 10 have suggestions or guidelines. 

 

4 say 8

1 say 9

3 say 10

 

The others are 11, 12 and 14 in Il.

 

Which states?  I know it's not in ours (PA) as we checked on things when our kids started school.  Granted, that was many moons ago... At that time it was only required (for our school) that someone be there to pick the kid up from the bus stop.  That someone did not have to be a parent, but did have to be someone the bus driver recognized.  If we had anyone other than a custodial parent pick the student up at school, we had to sign a paper allowing it.  We did not need to sign anything for the bus stop.

 

By first grade kids could walk or ride their bikes home (alone) from the bus stop.  Mine often did unless it was raining.  Then we'd get them.  It's 6/10ths of a mile from the bus stop to our house.

 

[Erin]

Wait, you are trying to compare car seat safety to this thread?

 

I agree, this thread really has nothing to do with physics (and that's what carseats deal with).

[MBM]

I am wondering what happens when a child becomes an adult. If the child has not had the opportunity to gradually navigate situations independently , I don't see how they have the skills needed to assess a variety of situations a young adult could find herself in. Plus, I imagine a level of visible anxiety the young adult could have that would make him/her an obvious target for random crime. I think (I might be wrong) persons who develop skills given small independent activities that are gradually increased will be less likely to exhibited the visible anxiety that makes a person appear to be a good target.

 

Consider a situation many young adults find themselves in: being alone at night needing to get to car or public transit in the dark after work or a late class. I imagine the young adult who has done very little without parental supervision is more likely to look like a target just because he lacks experience navigating things alone. This is not to say I advocate leaving dc to walk home alone at night. I think opportunities like walking home with a friend and not a parent during the day help the child build the skill level to deal with situation he may find when he's on his own. As would staying home alone or being in a hotel room alone.

 

Whether dealing getting home in the dark or figuring out how to get something fixed, I'm hoping my dc can figure this stuff out without me.

 

So, if you advocate restricting activities your dc does without adult presence, what happens when your dc become adults. Do they go away to college? Do they live at home and go to college -- what happens when they have night classes? Do they join the military? What sort of work do they do?

 

What sort of transition to adult level independence do you facilitate.

 

Children like mine who grow up in areas of high crime -- where it can be random and violent, where you see a lot of gang activity -- learn by observing what their parents and caregivers do. Urban kids develop street smarts as they grow up. They know what the crime entails, where it tends to be and the best ways to avoid it. There is no way I would have allowed my two oldest kids to roam the neighborhoods of Chicago where they grew up.

 

Yet somehow they managed to live in college dorms and finish college with electrical engineering degrees with high GPAs and then moved on to work and graduate school. Both have traveled extensively on their own, with each other, or with friends: Peru (twice), Bolivia, Mexico, Spain, Italy, France, and all over the US. These were not tours; they went on the fly (sometimes without reservations) and managed to survive.

 

Both have also traveled for work. My daughter worked as a consultant for five years and traveled on her own to areas of the US almost weekly. She has no problem navigating airports and cities, driving on busy highways or taking mass transit. Both she and her brother found their own places to live and do whatever it takes to function daily. One is married and lives out west and the other lives out east now.

 

To sum it up, they were not stunted at all.

 

Our youngest, who is growing up in a suburb, will probably do fine, too. I am not worried.

[mirth]

The difference between "best" and "good enough" comes up constantly.  And FWIW, the carseats made to pass more stringent Swedish crash test regulations really are better.   If you get to choose between the special Swedish one and any other, choose the one made to pass Swedish regs if it fits your car and your kid. Even better though, if you can choose not to drive at all, and get whatever thing it was you needed delivered.   Our choices, our lives are a constant balance between .... yada, yada, etc, etc.

 

One thing that has bothered me throughout these supervision threads is the tacit assumption that just because "an adult" is there, that we can all relax and leave the rat poison in unmarked bottles now because "an adult" is there.  Personally, I know several quite stupid adults.  I minimize my time with them and would never leave my children with them. Yes some of these people have children -- some younger than mine. some older than mine.  Children who make poor decisions all the time because their role models make wrong decisions all the time.  Children, who if they survive childhood, will have more to do with serendipity and quick reflexes than with quality parenting.

 

There is no better illustration of the general non-superiority of adults than when the words "unholstered firearm" enter a narrative.  And no, I don't believe most children will actually execute a reaction consistent with the inherent threat level accompanying an unholstered firearm unless their parents have specifically discussed this with them.  (Don't touch. Leave. Now.)

[SKL]

I agree, this thread really has nothing to do with ....

 

I'm questioning the mindset that says our standards of risk avoidance have to be the highest possible.  Why?  And why was this not the general mindset of the past?

[creekland]

Only 4 states have laws about ages for home alone. An additional 10 have suggestions or guidelines. 

 

4 say 8

1 say 9

3 say 10

 

The others are 11, 12 and 14 in Il.

 

Ok, I found a link on google, so for anyone interested, here it is:

 

http://www.latchkey-kids.com/latchkey-kids-age-limits.htm

 

As expected, PA has no law.  Even our school insisting on kindergartners being met at the bus is apparently just a school choice, not a law.

 

Those who have state law to deal with are:

 

MD, NC - age 8 (so 9 would be fine)

OR - age 10

IL - age 14

 

IL definitely seems out of touch IMO.  Only OR and IL residents would have to worry (legally) about 9 year olds being left alone.

[Χά�ων]

I'm questioning the mindset that says our standards of risk avoidance have to be the highest possible.  Why?  And why was this not the general mindset of the past?

Either you really do not get it or you are just trying to argue. 

[Catwoman]

Either you really do not get it or you are just trying to argue.

It also seems to be derailing the original topic. If she wants to talk about carseats and the "mindset of risk avoidance," perhaps she should start a new thread about it.

[SKL]

It also seems to be derailing the original topic. If she wants to talk about carseats and the "mindset of risk avoidance," perhaps she should start a new thread about it.

 

Actually I think the "mindset of risk avoidance" is relevant to this thread.

 

But I am checking out now, have fun.

[Catwoman]

Actually I think the "mindset of risk avoidance" is relevant to this thread.

 

But I am checking out now, have fun.

If you think it's relevant, why would you check out?

 

I'm not the Forum Police -- my opinion is only my opinion and nothing more. There's no reason for you to stop talking about something just because I said something about it.

 

Hey, maybe we don't agree on this thread, but so what? I still think you should post whatever you want to say. :)

[Barb_]

Ok, I found a link on google, so for anyone interested, here it is:

 

http://www.latchkey-kids.com/latchkey-kids-age-limits.htm

 

As expected, PA has no law. Even our school insisting on kindergartners being met at the bus is apparently just a school choice, not a law.

 

Those who have state law to deal with are:

 

MD, NC - age 8 (so 9 would be fine)

OR - age 10

IL - age 14

 

IL definitely seems out of touch IMO. Only OR and IL residents would have to worry (legally) about 9 year olds being left alone.

This has come up before. IL is just really weird. If you read the law closely it says child neglect is defined as to leaving a minor under 14 years of age “without supervision for an unreasonable period of time without regard for the mental or physical health, safety, or welfare of that minor.†According to the iL dept of Human Services, "there is no magic age" http://ccrs.illinois.edu/parents/childrenathomealone.html

 

So really, it's a badly written law that says nothing at all outside of common sense. It's more if a statement than anything. So in effect, IL is one of those states with no minimum age.

 

PS: also from IL legal aid:

 

Federal and Illinois law pretty much leave parents and guardians free to care for their children as they see fit. In certain situations, though, our criminal and child welfare laws permit the state to intervene. But even those laws leave the police and DCFS (the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services) a lot of leeway in deciding what to do.

 

Two criminal laws specifically deal with unattended kids. One says that leaving a child “6 years of age or younger unattended in a motor vehicle for more than 10 minutes†may be child endangerment. “Unattended†means not accompanied by someone at least 14 years old, or out of that person’s sight. This offense is a Class A misdemeanor (possible 1 year in jail and $1,000 fine).

 

And:

 

The Illinois Criminal Code also makes “child abandonment†a Class 4 felony, punishable by 1 to 3 years in prison. It’s child abandonment, the law says, to knowingly leave a child:

 

age 10-13 alone for 24 hours or more

age 7-10 alone for 8 hours or more

age 0-7 alone for 2 hours or more

under age 18 with physical or mental special needs alone for 2 hours or more

The law lists 20 factors to consider, like the child’s age and special needs, whether they were left entirely alone, whether they had an emergency number to call, and whether the parent or guardian informed another person that the child will be alone.

[Lara in Colo]

and honestly, no minimum age worries me more-- it is left to the opinion of the caseworker-- that is scary.

 

 

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I am getting tickled about the mass transit examples. And I am, for sure, a helicopter parent. But the one time I have even thought of taking mass transit, other than airplanes, was in Washington DC. DD and I were on an Adventures By Disney trip and had the afternoon off. We had decided to go exploring on the Metro. When we saw the crowds, we decided it would be too much of a pain so we hired a driver instead. The train we were about to get on crashed injuring several people.

 

DD13 never gets left alone. DH works from home and we have elderly living with us. She has no regularly scheduled chores either. Yet, she can pay the family bills when needed, cook dinner when parents are working, give her grandmother injections through a PICC line, arrange for a driver to her classes, and actually sing a solo in front of 800 people.

 

Like her brother before her, she will walk out of my wallet at age 25ish or so and have the first episode where mommy isn't directing her every move. She will do just fine. She also plans to be a physician like most of her family. And I doubt, like most of her family, she will ever ride mass transit, except airplanes. It will also be the first time she has to clean her own toilet.

 

What a sad thing to brag about. Hopefully life never throws your family a curve ball.

 

[creekland]

What a sad thing to brag about. Hopefully life never throws your family a curve ball.

 

 

I'd have died young in that kind of household...

 

But genetics can produce those with different thoughts about it.  Evidently the daughter has a different genetic make up than I do.  That would be a good thing in her situation.