leaving children on their own?

victory

moneysaymoneydo wrote: »

As pointed out blame the kid, they needed fed i was doing it for their sakes. Who else would put food on the table? in this case the OP had a OT - hmm then again he was only 15 mins drive away how reassuring!

Next you will be saying going out at night leaving kids to prostitute to feed them is ok, god excuses for our own choices, shame poor left alone kids dont have such choices for human rights of being cared for properly not left like a pet at home doors locked waiting for mum to return if she can be bothered!

Just curious if kids can be left at 9 then what age can they be dumped overnight?

I get what you are saying even though its greatly exaggerated but it also has scaremongering all over it, sure accidents happen but they are very terrible isolated incidents not reflected in how many families do have to leave their kids for x amount of time and nothing happens.

poet123

Dunroamin wrote: »

I wish I could be so confident as to believe that we now have all the answers and that previous generations were totally wrong. However, looking at the world around me, I find it very difficult to see how anyone can believe this,

You misunderstand me.

I certainly don't say that previous generations were totally wrong. They lived in a different world. They didn't have the choices we have, they didn't have the safety net, and so children were, by necessity, left alone, had to look after siblings, and grow up very fast. That imperative is not there today except in very exceptional circumstances, there is a safety net and we have real choices. Those on this thread have made that choice and have done so not from neceesity but because they choose to do so.

I share your concern about many things to do with the youth of today, but leaving nine year olds home alone will not solve any of them imo.

valk_scot

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.

My dad went down the coal pits to learn to be a miner when he was twelve years old, that would have been in the 1930's. My mum left school at 14 and started a full time job in a shop. None of this "Oh, they're children, they're too young for..." back then, they were regarded as young adults.

And when I started secondary school in 1970 my mum was working till 6pm every night so it was up to me to get the shopping on the way home from school and start prepping the dinner up, my sister who was two years older (different school) was in charge of the general cleaning and ironing. We'd be 11 and 13 and we could do just about anything in the house my mum could. So I have to say that if I was working, I'd not really be worried about my 11 year old being home alone for an hour after school till her older brother got home because it's the same sort of thing I was doing at her age.

peachyprice

poet123 wrote: »

You misunderstand me.

I certainly don't say that previous generations were totally wrong. They lived in a different world. They didn't have the choices we have, they didn't have the safety net, and so children were, by necessity, left alone,

That's really quite ironic, only a week or so ago I commented on a thread about the recent trend for SAHM's needing to send their children to nursery because they couldn't cope with looking after two at a time, 5 days a week, with no 'respite', only to be told by several posters that it wasn't necessary in the old days because everyone had extended family nearby and the community to help out.

poet123

peachyprice wrote: »

That's really quite ironic, only a week or so ago I commented on a thread about the recent trend for SAHM's needing to send their children to nursery because they couldn't cope with looking after two at a time, 5 days a week, with no 'respite', only to be told by several posters that it wasn't necessary in the old days because everyone had extended family nearby and the community to help out.

I suppose it depends what period we are looking at, and what social class perhaps?

PolishBigSpender

Toto wrote: »

I had childcare for my older kids until they were well into secondary school, probably close to 13.

Really? I'm sorry for your children, they must have been mocked senseless by their peers. Weren't they also allowed outside y themselves by this age? Were they always walked/driven to school?
Perfect way to bring up completely inept adults!

zagfles

poet123 wrote: »

Then you would be wrong, nor do I think I have ever given that impression.

But it's what I think that counts, isn't that the rules? You assume my emotion, then don't believe me when I give the answer, then I assume yours, and I don't believe your answer? Only you know if I'm right and only I know if you're right.

I'm sure there's a point to it, but I can't think what. Is it a regular thing on this board? The other boards on MSE don't seem to play it, sometimes people question each others' facts, sometimes they question their opinions, occasionally they question others' morals and if the debate get really heated they may question parentage. But I've never had my emotion questioned.

And what is Person One's motivation for thinking the same thing?

Well, she seems to have some moral or religious objection to learning from real peoples' misfortunes.

Still, I suppose you need to clutch at all the straws you can get!!;):rotfl:

Ah ha! A wink and a laugh! Now that's never a real emotion!! Unless you're a pirate who's had too much rum!! Yes, you're definitely lying about your emotion there. So unless you are in fact Bluebeard, I declare myself the winner! You decide my emotion: :j:beer::mad::p;):D:o:cool::eek::rotfl::T:A:):(

zagfles

moneysaymoneydo wrote: »

Next you will be saying going out at night leaving kids to prostitute to feed them is ok, god excuses for our own choices,

And the award for best strawman of the thread goes to...

poet123

zagfles wrote: »

But it's what I think that counts, isn't that the rules? You assume my emotion, then don't believe me when I give the answer, then I assume yours, and I don't believe your answer? Only you know if I'm right and only I know if you're right.

I'm sure there's a point to it, but I can't think what. Is it a regular thing on this board? The other boards on MSE don't seem to play it, sometimes people question each others' facts, sometimes they question their opinions, occasionally they question others' morals and if the debate get really heated they may question parentage. But I've never had my emotion questioned. Well, she seems to have some moral or religious objection to learning from real peoples' misfortunes. Ah ha! A wink and a laugh! Now that's never a real emotion!! Unless you're a pirate who's had too much rum!! Yes, you're definitely lying about your emotion there. So unless you are in fact Bluebeard, I declare myself the winner! You decide my emotion: :j:beer::mad::p;):D:o:cool::eek::rotfl::T:A:):(

Perhaps you can tell me why I would play the "my children are more mature than yours" game when mine are grown up?;)

You, on the other hand clearly illustrated your point with a dig at someone via her daughter to suit your agenda.

Person One and I rarely see eye to eye, but I don't doubt her intent was slightly different from the one you conferred onto her; rather than learning, insert "gloating" which was what you were doing. Not a nice trait, still, however you use your emoticons they are no substitute for words, and your words told your intent very clearly!!

Funky_Bold_Ribena

PolishBigSpender wrote: »

Really? I'm sorry for your children, they must have been mocked senseless by their peers. Weren't they also allowed outside y themselves by this age? Were they always walked/driven to school?
Perfect way to bring up completely inept adults!

Ever thought of sticking to a Polish forum? Every time you are on here you just 'have a go'. Why do you bother? Really, get over it. British are not as clever/witty/adept/add your choice as you are. Have a medal. Make yourself a laminated badge. :T:T:T

Honestly, why? It's so repetitive. *yawns.