leaving children on their own?

peachyprice

poet123 wrote: »

“Your sons are still too young to be left alone for these periods on
such a regular basis. Some schools provide after school clubs, sports activities or
homework groups to assist parents to manage these gaps. Ask your school about
what’s available locally. Perhaps there are friends or neighbours who would look
after the boys some afternoons, or at least who can be available for the boys to visit
or call if they are upset by anything.

That seems quite clear to me.

They should have started that sentence with "In our opinion" because guidelines are just that, not set in stone, not law, not enforcable, not something we are forced to live our lives by, just the opinion of the organisation writing the piece.

amyandrew14

A personal opinion children must never be left unattended

Toto

Children and not little adults. They have their entire lives to be grown up and do grown up stuff. Kids need supervision. I honestly feel that as parents it is our job to minimise the risks to ensure our kids grow up safe and healthy.

Children don't always make good choices and they don't always do things they know they should do. I've seen many people make bad choices throughout my career and more than a few of them have ended up in the morgue because of it.

Call it mollycoddling if you will, but I prefer to think of it as supervising children until they are old enough to make their own choices and understand the consequences of their actions.

valk_scot

poet123 wrote: »

In the pdf is this advice:
After school
“We both have jobs that require long hours. We take turns to get home as early as
possible, usually around six, but that means the boys have to let themselves in to
the house and look after themselves for a few hours. We have ensured they have
emergency numbers and have taught them not to open the door to strangers.”
Scott and Liz, parents of James, 11, and Josh, nine.
Jane says
,

“Your sons are still too young to be left alone for these periods on
such a regular basis. Some schools provide after school clubs, sports activities or
homework groups to assist parents to manage these gaps. Ask your school about
what’s available locally. Perhaps there are friends or neighbours who would look
after the boys some afternoons, or at least who can be available for the boys to visit
or call if they are upset by anything.

That seems quite clear to me.

"These periods on such a regular basis"= a few hours four or five times per week, in the given example. I think very few parents would argue that this is reasonable over a long period of time and in fact the advice given is to see if the parents can cut this down on some afternoons, not stop entirely. And to try to have a standby neighbour or such availible. At no point do they say or even suggest that it's inappropriate to leave them alone at all.

Also the example is not the same as leaving the same children alone for an hour or even two due to unforeseen circumstances, which is what the general gist of this topic is discussing. There's a lot of variation between leaving the kids in the example for 2-3 hours every school day over many months and never leaving the same kids alone for even five minutes. It's not really valid to try to apply the advice given in one rather extreme example to such a wide range of possibilities even if the advice does say what you're making it out to say. Which it doesn't, of course.

Shepherd1

ash28 wrote: »

We live in a rural area and it is very common for children from the age of 4 or 5 to use the school buses - at that age they are supervised on to the right bus at the school. But by the time they are in year 3 they have to get on the right bus and get off at the right place. Not every village has a school and not every household has 2 cars. The school run has different connotation here.

Buses to and from school is norm for a lot of children here.

Do these children then let themselves into an empty house and stay alone for up to an hour? as that is what I was talking about not just about getting the bus.

Joons

I think that is too young, haven't read all the replies tho but I'm sure it's against the law. The fact you are writing shows your concern about this but I assume it's sorted now with client.

I never left my child until she was about 13 and then it was for very short periods of time. Just imagine how bad you would feel if something awful happened, you'd never forgive yourself.

poet123

peachyprice wrote: »

They should have started that sentence with "In our opinion" because guidelines are just that, not set in stone, not law, not enforcable, not something we are forced to live our lives by, just the opinion of the organisation writing the piece.

Yes, the NSPCC, who are hardly a little known or hole in the wall organisation.

valk_scot wrote: »

"These periods on such a regular basis"= a few hours four or five times per week, in the given example. I think very few parents would argue that this is reasonable over a long period of time and in fact the advice given is to see if the parents can cut this down on some afternoons, not stop entirely. And to try to have a standby neighbour or such availible. At no point do they say or even suggest that it's inappropriate to leave them alone at all.

Also the example is not the same as leaving the same children alone for an hour or even two due to unforeseen circumstances, which is what the general gist of this topic is discussing. There's a lot of variation between leaving the kids in the example for 2-3 hours every school day over many months and never leaving the same kids alone for even five minutes. It's not really valid to try to apply the advice given in one rather extreme example to such a wide range of possibilities even if the advice does say what you're making it out to say. Which it doesn't, of course.

Firstly, you are splitting hairs, secondly, I copied it verbatim, and the children mentioned include an 11 year old not just a nine year old, and the advice refers to both children.

It is obvious the organisation (NSPCC) are not happy with children under 12 being left alone, nor are the majority of posters as borne out by the poll on the other thread.

You may choose to interpret it differently but really it is quite obvious what they mean. As it is not a law they cannot be stronger in the their wording but the meaning is clear enough.

peachyprice

poet123 wrote: »

Yes, the NSPCC, who are hardly a little known or hole in the wall organisation.

FGS, enough is enough, where the hell did I say that. Please, don't make things up just because I don't agree with you.

I'm out of here.

poet123

peachyprice wrote: »

FGS, enough is enough, where the hell did I say that. Please, don't make things up just because I don't agree with you.

I'm out of here.

I am not making things up, your comment suggested that "the organisation" didn't really know what they were talking about. The NSPCC are an accepted authority, so if they give an opinion it does carry some weight.

Do calm down, no need for histrionics.

Tupperware_Queen

amyandrew14 wrote: »

A personal opinion children must never be left unattended

what would you consider a child? Under the laws governing child protection a young person can be considered a child up until the age of 18 (older if disabled).

As for the 'all or nothing' attitude that this sort of comment reflects, how do you manage as the child grows older, what magically happens on their 16th, 17th or 18th birthday which means that they are able to be left alone when they could not the day before?