Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:
Verification:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview


Topic Summary

Posted by: Jack
« on: April 06, 2018, 02:07:42 pm »

I said before, and I'm sure I'll repeat again, but there are really two problems.

1) Media.  When I was a kid, there were three TV networks, plus PBS.  In DFW, we had (usually) two independent stations - channel 11 and a UHF channel - 39.  Today, there are more 24 hour news stations than that, and if there's nothing new to report, they'll just keep broadcasting the same old stuff over and over again - or they'll look for 'stories' that really aren't, or some of them will just make things up.  Because of their drive for ratings, people now have a much scarier opinion of the world than is merited.

2) Blame.  Something about the US psyche demands that someone be blamed (I blame it, like many other problems, on today's version of evangelic Chritsianity).  If it's an accident, someone has to take the blame for it, and if a kid was hurt, who better to blame than the parent, who wasn't there supervising their little darling 24/7. 
Posted by: squarecutter
« on: April 06, 2018, 10:47:50 am »

Im not sure our generation gave it much thought. BacK from when I was about 8 I was a choir boy in our village church, I could let myself out of a back gate onto a public footpath that could take one from the railway station going left to the cjhurch going right through a churchyard. Swing to the right  took you down to a parade of shops including the Post office as the path bisected a field. The other way led to the main road Cross that one road and I could then follow it to the recreation ground whee on saturdays you hook yourself up with a game of football with the local kids, (jumpers for goalposts, UK version perhaps of the Sandlot kids .) The village in other words was our oyster and nobody much worried unless you werent home when expected. Free range barely existed as a term either for kids or eggs come to that. When did things change?
Posted by: Jack
« on: March 28, 2018, 03:46:35 am »

Quote from: kalico on March 27, 2018, 10:42:29 pm
Wow never even knew there were laws

A lot of the problem is that there aren't laws. That means parents like the Meitivs in Maryland can face legal problems (their children were taken into custody) for letting their kids (10 and 6) walk to the park that was two blocks from their home, based on some busybody calling the cops and the cops not having anything better to do with their time.  We have become so scared that parents now need legal protection in some areas to allow their kids any freedom at all.
Posted by: kalico
« on: March 27, 2018, 10:42:29 pm »

Wow never even knew there were laws .....but I was free range but I had to give specifics and be where I was or there was trouble and I’m the same with my kids..... they go to the school and park to play on there bikes..

Now I wouldn’t probably let a 9 year old take public bus or a subway but leaving my kids alone and in cars I do now that Hannah is 12 but I asked my neighbor who is a cop and he says as long as I feel said child is responsible it’s up to me ... I kinda agree that those moms that left the kids in parks while they worked was not smart, big difference from going to play for a hour or so to being there for hours

All I can say is “it’s a whole nother world “ than when I grew up and I wouldn’t want to grow up now...


Thanks for the good read and thoughts
Hugs kal
Posted by: 18Smacked
« on: March 27, 2018, 06:22:28 pm »

While one may not like statistics, they are what they are, and Jack is more than correct with his data. BTW- I did have one cousin who sustained a head injury from a bike accident in his 20's. He is the only one I knew who may have benefited from wearing a helmet while riding a bike.

It sure is true that attitudes and practices of child-rearing have changed dramatically over the past fifty or so years. When I was 10 years-old, I used to stay at home by myself (i.e. no baby-sitter) when my parents went out for dinner, and a movie followed by going to someone’s house until about midnight, and they would not be home until about 1 AM. My brother was 4 years older than me, and he’d be out with his friends until about midnight. I would have my dinner to reheat, watch TV and do whatever I wanted until it was time for me to go to bed. My parents would come home, fund me in bed, and go to bed themselves.

We lived in a suburb 21 miles from the state capital, and at 12 years-old, I would get a ride from my mom to where I could meet my cousin who was my age, and we’d take the trolley car into “town.” There, we would go to the Science or Art Museum, using the mass transit to get there. Sometimes we’d go to see the Red Sox play or just tour around the town, having lunch at a restaurant, etc. It was simply expected that I would be independent like this.

However, if a child today were to do this sort of thing, it might be reported as child abuse. This is outrageous; kids in Europe are using mass transit and going about in the city all by themselves at 7 and 8 years of age. Why Americans are so protective of their children is kind of hard to understand. I think it may be partially related to the drop in family size. This has the effect of making each child “more valuable” to the parents, I guess. I suspect that there are more reasons why we are so stiflingly protective of our children, but I can’t figure them out. I will say that I do not think it is healthy. I know I relished my freedom, and felt that it was a reflection of my ability to handle responsibility. When children are always made to behave/act like children, they never will mature into behaving like adults.
Posted by: David M. Katz
« on: March 24, 2018, 03:01:07 pm »

One down and forty-nine to go. 
Posted by: afinch
« on: March 24, 2018, 02:40:23 pm »

So was I.  I walked or rode my bike to school.  I had a latch key from 7th grade on.  I came home and rode my bike around until it was dark.  I toured Europe ALONE all summer when I was 16, 17, and 18.  And not only survived but thrived, creating some of the best memories I have during that time.  Helicopter parenting hasn't made the world a better place or a safer one.
Posted by: David M. Katz
« on: March 24, 2018, 01:30:54 pm »

I was a free range kid and survived.
Posted by: Jack
« on: March 23, 2018, 04:20:13 pm »

I hate to break it to the two of you, but you're both wrong about it being as safe for kids now as it was in your childhood.  According to statistics, it's safer for children now than it any point in American history.  A lot of that is due to vaccines and hygiene, but even in the last 50 or 60 years, child mortality rates have continued to drop.

I think Adric hit the nail on the head (and I've said this myself many times now) - the 24/7 news cycle has exposed us to things we would never have heard about even 30 years ago.  Because they have to fill news 24/7, they will broadcast things to death, until people think that one freak, 1 in a million, situation is run of the mill.

I read a study that said Americans seek to lay blame.  People in Japan (for instance) want to solve a problem.  American's want to lay blame for that problem.  That's probably why 'guns don't kill people' is a saying that some people manage to say with a straight face.  That's why a boy who wants to give himself a bath, then drowns while Mom is looking at Facebook, is the mom's fault, and why the answer is obviously to not let children bathe themselves until their at least 16.

This is just my opinion - not based on anything - but I'm willing to bet that most people don't understand statistics.  For instance, the odds of being hit by lightning are higher than those of being abducted by a stranger (not going to swear to that, but I think it's true).  Let's look at bicycle helmets.  People place a huge emphasis on these to the point of making laws requiring them and indoctrinating kids to the point where some kids won't ride a bike on the grass without one.   we've probably all heard the figure that helmets reduce the risk of head injuries by 70% (I've also seen 85%).  What they don't know is that, with children under 15, in 2016, there were only 317 bike related deaths or serious injuries.  Every kid I knew growing up had a bike, none of us had helmets, and not one of us had a serious injury?  Now, I'm not going to say wearing a helmet is bad, because it's an easy way to reduce a risk.  But does it deserve all the emphasis it gets?

Anyway, I think I'm a bit too strict to be truly Free Range, but I do try (and I do have the excuse of a lot more kids to track than most people have).
Posted by: Zyngaru
« on: March 23, 2018, 03:23:44 pm »

As defined by that article, I was a free range kid.  I watched my brothers and sisters in the car, while mom and dad went into the store to shop.  I walked to and from all my schools but two.  Those were 5 miles or more away and I took a city bus.  I played at playgrounds and parks with friends without adult supervision.

At first I almost disagreed with the Free Range idea, but the way it was defined I agree with it.  I originally thought before reading the article, that free range meant without adult knowledge of where the child is or should be.  My parents demanded to know where I was and when I was coming home.  If I were caught someplace other than where I said I was going, or got home late, I got my butt busted.

I do believe parents need to know both where their child is and when to expect them back.  If something untoward did happen, the parent needs a starting place to try and find their kid.

So as long as free range doesn't mean, that the kid leaves in the morning and returns whenever they want to return, without the parent having any idea of where their child is or what they are doing, then I am okay with it.

I agree with Adric that child danger is probably no worse now than when I was a kid.  Just now we have 24/7 news instantly from all around the world, so any incident of a child being grabbed is instantly all over the news.

That said, I don't want to downplay the danger of kids being grabbed by dangerous people.  It does happen.  Just not as often as the news channels make it out to happen.
Posted by: Adric
« on: March 23, 2018, 01:26:25 pm »

I just learned that Free Range Parenting has just been legalized in Utah.  I guess sometime while I wasn't looking it became child abuse to allow your children to go outside the house alone.  Weird.  When I was growing up I walked to and from school every day during the school year.  After my grandmother died I was a latch-key kid and arrived home to an empty house after school to fend for myself the remaining two hours before Mom and Dad got home from work.

In the summer I "free-ranged" all over the big city by hopping a city bus, spending the day in the main downtown library, meeting Mom for lunch at a hotel halfway between the library and her office, etc. etc.  During all of that I was never picked up by the dogcatcher CPS, and I never imagined that I was the victim of child abuse.

I don't know if being a child alone in a public place is any more hazardous now than it was those many years ago.  Perhaps the hazards are just more in the news now than they used to be.  I would have felt awfully restricted growing up if I had to haul a parent around with me everywhere I went.

Strangely people's pets in those days were also free range.  Your dogs and cats went out during the day to do whatever they wanted to do, coming home at mealtime.  That's how it was.  Now if you see a dog running loose outside you immediately assume lost dog, and you run to rescue it.  The same must now be true of an unattended minor.