leaving children on their own?

Person_one

zagfles wrote: »

I used to know a woman who always thought she knew what was best for other peoples' kids, was always sitting in judgement on what other parents did. We wouldn't have dared tell her we left our kids alone at 9, she'd have probably reported us to social services!

Guess what? Her daughter got pregnant at 14!!! :eek:

Schadenfreude?

FBaby

So there is a number below which you would not leave a child? That is at odds with the theory you have been expounding on here and the charge of my fixation with an arbitrary number

No there isn't, that is my point! I would never leave a child of 4 alone not because they are 4, but because at that age, there are completely unlikely to have the maturity required to look after themselves. At least my children definitely didn't have it, so it never crossed my mind to do it. I also told my son that he couldn't ride his bike alone to school despite him begging. That's because he doesn't have much experience of it. However, a friend of ours goes on bike ride every week-end with his sons and has done so since they were 5 or 6. They are excellent riders and well aware of road safety. They have been riding to school since they were 10.

My children weren't left on the basis of maturity or otherwise but on the basis of my judgement that for me as a parent that was the optimum age. They may have been perfectly capable of being left, but I didn't have the need, or rather I structured my life and work so that it wouldn't be necessary

This is exactly what I don't understand. If you thought they could have done it, why not allowing it? Also, lucky you that you didn't have the need and were able to structure your life around, unfortunately, not everyone is so fortunate to have such flexibility.

I don't know why you take offense at the issue of 'maturity'. Maturity is a stage at a particular age. It's not because some children are less mature at a particular age that they are bound to be less successful later in life. They might possibly being more dependent on their parents for longer (to be debated), but that doesn't mean they can't succeed in their career any differently. I don't see my children being more mature than their friends as making them better or more perfect. They are just more capable than the average in dealing with certain matters, that's all.

I am making no allegations, they are merely comments. I quite clearly said we would have to agree to disagree. Your children, your call. I have my opinion, you have yours, thankfully, we are both entitled to parent as we see fit.

The line between allegations and 'merely comments' is subjective You've argued each time I try to explain why I considered my son capable of staying home alone, deciding from the start that it was inappropriate regardless what I said. You've made your decision that my son was unsafe home alone based on a generalisation rather than my explanations. But at least we do agree at the end

All I want to make clear is that none of the decisions I take in regards to my children are taken on the basis of convenience. I have sacrificed a lot for my children over the years, especially being a single mum. Their well-being has always been my priority. If I do what I do, it is because I absolutely believe they are safe.

poet123

FBaby wrote: »

No there isn't, that is my point! I would never leave a child of 4 alone not because they are 4, but because at that age, there are completely unlikely to have the maturity required to look after themselves. At least my children definitely didn't have it, so it never crossed my mind to do it. I also told my son that he couldn't ride his bike alone to school despite him begging. That's because he doesn't have much experience of it. However, a friend of ours goes on bike ride every week-end with his sons and has done so since they were 5 or 6. They are excellent riders and well aware of road safety. They have been riding to school since they were 10.



This is exactly what I don't understand. If you thought they could have done it, why not allowing it? Also, lucky you that you didn't have the need and were able to structure your life around, unfortunately, not everyone is so fortunate to have such flexibility.

I don't know why you take offense at the issue of 'maturity'. Maturity is a stage at a particular age. It's not because some children are less mature at a particular age that they are bound to be less successful later in life. They might possibly being more dependent on their parents for longer (to be debated), but that doesn't mean they can't succeed in their career any differently. I don't see my children being more mature than their friends as making them better or more perfect. They are just more capable than the average in dealing with certain matters, that's all.



The line between allegations and 'merely comments' is subjective You've argued each time I try to explain why I considered my son capable of staying home alone, deciding from the start that it was inappropriate regardless what I said. You've made your decision that my son was unsafe home alone based on a generalisation rather than my explanations. But at least we do agree at the end

All I want to make clear is that none of the decisions I take in regards to my children are taken on the basis of convenience. I have sacrificed a lot for my children over the years, especially being a single mum. Their well-being has always been my priority. If I do what I do, it is because I absolutely believe they are safe.

You really have got your knickers in a twist over this thread. You made comments about your son and I and others responded to them.

You construe things one way because of personal bias, that is fine, but others have alternate viewpoints. For example, it is not universally a compliment that a child is mature for his age, I have heard that said to parents by others when the reality is they think the child is old headed and a worry wart because his behaviour is very different to his peers. No comment is ever simply one sided, even if we only see one side of it.

I didn't allow it because it wasn't their behaviour/capability I had a problem with it was other, outside factors, which I have no control over and I don't think it appropriate for me as parent to put the responsibility for coping with such factors onto them when there is no great need. Maturity never came into it at nine for me, I didn't/don't think it appropriate.

As for being lucky to structure my life round my children's needs, there was no luck involved, it was a conscious decision which involved sacrifice and a lot of juggling.

You have taken the comments personally for whatever reason and completely dismissed any concerns raised with regard to your son, as is your prerogative.

Your comments re my being lucky to be able to work around my children and your assertion that you would only do xyz if you were happy they could cope do not sit well together. Surely, if you are doing this, you are also working around your children as I did? If not, then I think you actually have issues re having to leave your child that this thread may have uncovered and that is why you are responding so vehemently to what were generalisations and personal opinions.

Much earlier in the thread I said we would have to agree to disagree, but you really don't seem to want to do that. Instead you seek to change minds and seem to want validation for your decision. Why is it that others should change their minds and your view remain the same? I disagree with leaving a child (any child) younger than around 12 home alone except in an emergency, that was my opinion at the outset and it remains so now.

zagfles

Person_one wrote: »

Schadenfreude?

Think of it as a parable.

Person_one

zagfles wrote: »

Think of it as a parable.

No thanks, that's a real 14 year old.

zagfles

Person_one wrote: »

No thanks, that's a real 14 year old.

So what are you saying? We shouldn't use real examples of what can happen to learn lessons about anything?

A real 14 year old got killed by some dogs recently. Still, let's just ignore it ever happened and not learn any lessons from it. Same with a kid recently who got seriously injured on a crossing near here. I used that to reinforce to my kids how important it is to be careful crossing the road, and several people wrote to the council asking for a pelican to be installed.

You can bury your head in the sand if you want. Don't tell me to though. Ta ta.

poet123

I think what she is saying is that we shouldn't take pleasure in the misfortunes of others to bolster our own viewpoint. Particularly when the girl was an innocent party in your commentary re her mother. Who, let's be frank, may actually have acted correctly, but just not to your liking.

zagfles

poet123 wrote: »

I think what she is saying is that we shouldn't take pleasure in the misfortunes of others to bolster our own viewpoint. Particularly when the girl was an innocent party in your commentary re her mother. Who, let's be frank, may actually have acted correctly, but just not to your liking.

Err, so did you see a :j or a :rotfl:or a in my previous post? No, there was a :eek: Does that mean I'm laughing do you think? Hover over it, that might give you a clue.

Dunroamin

MrsE wrote: »

I used to love Enid Blyton books, but to be fair no children had their freedom. Didn't they go off camping together as young teens?

Young teens used to be able to go youth hostelling on their own when I was that age and that included camping. My friend and I planned a trip every year from the age of 12, although our parents never allowed us to do it.

poet123

zagfles wrote: »

Err, so did you see a :j or a :rotfl:or a in my previous post? No, there was a :eek: Does that mean I'm laughing do you think? Hover over it, that might give you a clue.

You mentioned it in the way of saying she stuck her nose in other peoples business and look what happened under her own nose. Why mention it otherwise? There was a clear element of pleasure in the post, regardless of what emoticon was used.;)