leaving children on their own?

FBaby

Person_one wrote: »

Are you aware of how incredibly patronising that sounds?

I think she gets it, and poet will tell you she and I very rarely agree!

Oh because telling me that she gets my point exactly isn't patronizing?

Nor this?

I think that your comments "that most need it" show that you believe that somehow your particular child is so advanced, so outside the norm that he is immune to the dangers or issues other children of his age could fall prey to. I suspect that was why the other poster called you deluded.

I don't believe my child is so advanced as written and that's not what my posts were about at all

poet123

FBaby wrote: »

We are going over the same thing over and over....I am NOT saying that all 9 year old can be left alone. That's what childcare is available, because most need it, just not ALL! By the way, my local council funded holiday scheme allows children to walk there and back on their own with parent's agreement. Do you think the council is acting totally irresponsibly for even providing this choice to parents?

That is what you said. Clearly you were referring to your son.

So, if most do need it but he doesn't you must consider him to be more mature, advanced or whatever designation you choose. How else can that be interpreted?

If he doesn't need it I assume he is left alone all day in the school holidays?

PolishBigSpender

Of course you can leave them alone, they are big girls.

Funky_Bold_Ribena

gemma1979 wrote: »

I could not imagine leaving a 7 year old alone all night no matter what and every week night. To be honest how nothing ever happened is beyond me.

I know that 7 is very very young, and you haven't forgiven your mum but nothing did happen...I think you should try and get some help for your anxiety and try to forgive your mum - she obviously had to work to keep a roof over your head and food on the table - and had no other choice.

I'm also a 'left alone' kid - at 9 I was babysitting for my little brother and step-sister [5 and 6] and learnt many of my 'ye of little patience','suffering no fools gladly' and 'key people management' techniques from the experience. And some things DID happen - one day my brother and step sister jumped on the car roof so much [I was reading a book at the time, a sunny summer Sunday] and caved it in. I was in big trouble but hey - that's what happens when you leave a 9 yr old in charge!

I was traumatised though when I was told at age 10 that if the TV set the [new fibre glass] curtains on fire, simply throw the TV out of the window, it will all be fine. In the 70s, the TVs were bigger than I was. :eek:

PolishBigSpender

nzmegs wrote: »

Sorry, 9 & 10 is far too young to be left alone in the house. My son is nearly 14 and I still only leave him for an hour or two at the most and never in charge of our younger daughter who is 11.

I think you need to rethink your priorities. your kids should come before work - sorry.

You must be joking. You only leave your 14 years old son for an hour or two??
He's a big boy.
Stop guilt-tripping OP, she has her priorities right. Her daughters are big enough to be left alone. It's you who should think long and hard, whether you are not molly-coddling your kids.

PolishBigSpender

trevorsminted wrote: »

Who needs childminders from age 9 you can leave a kid home alone, gosh if only i had known that now, selfish me making sure a responsible adult was there when kids from age 8+ are sooo mature and sensible for their age. Lock front door but leave back door open for emergency, thumbs up to the responsible parents brigade

Yes, you're right, having a child minder for a 9 year old is frankly speaking ridiculous.
I do think spendless has done a good job as a parent.

thorsoak

Let's get this whole "age" thing into perspective. What was right in one age is looked upon with horror in the next.

For instance, in 1916, when my mother was 6 years of age, she had to look after three younger siblings, from 6am until 7pm, getting their breakfasts, getting them dressed and ready for school AND cooking dinner (on a coal-fired range) - because her mother had no-one who could look after the children whilst she worked in the munitions factory (grandfather was posted missing in the war, and as missing she couldn't get the widow's pension).

This probably coloured my mother's opinion as to when we could be left responsibly (1950s) - I was allowed to stay home on my own when the rest of the family went on holiday when I was 17 (didn't want to miss the last day of school).

Fast forward to the 1980s, we would leave our 14 year old DD to babysit her 2 younger brothers (always ensuring that oldest DS was staying over at a friend's house - or WWIII would break out ).

Now, in USA, DGD aged 13, regularly babysits for a neighbour's child, and DGD in IoM, aged 14 regularly babysits for friends.

Toto

PolishBigSpender wrote: »

Yes, you're right, having a child minder for a 9 year old is frankly speaking ridiculous.
I do think spendless has done a good job as a parent.

I don't think having a child minder for a 9 year old is ridiculous at all. I would never imagine walking away from a house with a 9 year old home alone and feeling comfortable with that at all. I had childcare for my older kids until they were well into secondary school, probably close to 13. After that the little one was born and we hired a nanny. But really, without the little one and the special needs middle child, I still would not have left any of them at aged 9.

If anything happened to them, I would never ever forgive myself and I could not hand on heart justify what had happened as something out of my control. My job is to do whatever I can do to make sure my kids grow up healthy and in one piece. Stuff happens, we all know that but we have to minimise the risks where we can.

Tupperware_Queen

thorsoak wrote: »

Let's get this whole "age" thing into perspective. What was right in one age is looked upon with horror in the next.

For instance, in 1916, when my mother was 6 years of age, she had to look after three younger siblings, from 6am until 7pm, getting their breakfasts, getting them dressed and ready for school AND cooking dinner (on a coal-fired range) - because her mother had no-one who could look after the children whilst she worked in the munitions factory (grandfather was posted missing in the war, and as missing she couldn't get the widow's pension).

This probably coloured my mother's opinion as to when we could be left responsibly (1950s) - I was allowed to stay home on my own when the rest of the family went on holiday when I was 17 (didn't want to miss the last day of school).

Fast forward to the 1980s, we would leave our 14 year old DD to babysit her 2 younger brothers (always ensuring that oldest DS was staying over at a friend's house - or WWIII would break out ).

Now, in USA, DGD aged 13, regularly babysits for a neighbour's child, and DGD in IoM, aged 14 regularly babysits for friends.

Possibly the most common sense answer on the thread :T:T:T:T

zagfles

poet123 wrote: »

Protest all you like that was how it came across, as an element of glee that she had got her comeuppance.

Ooh, OK if we're playing "assume the emotion", then I'd say you're jealous that FBaby and I have kids who were mature enough to be left alone at 9