leaving children on their own?

Dunroamin

Toto wrote: »

Do you have any evidence to support that claim?

Why should I be the only one to be asked for evidence for my opinion?

It's a bit late in the discussion for statistics, don't you think, after nearly 300 posts based totally on opinions and personal experience?

Toto

It was rather a sweeping statement, I felt you must have some basis for making such a judgement, which is why I asked.

valk_scot

FBaby wrote: »

The thing is it's by letting your child alone at home and seeing that they are coping absolutely fine that you gain the full confidence they are ok. So you might start with emergencies and you then move towards short times that are not emergencies. In the meantime the child gets older!

This thread had made me think that it really isn't about being home alone but at which stage we are comfortable with giving more responsibilities to our children. For instance, when were they allowed to walk in front without holding hands, when were they allowed to use a knife etc... I realise that as a whole I let my kids do all these things earlier than most of my friends with their children.

Many here would probably say I have been lucky that both my children have not once sustained an accident as a result. I don't agree, I believe they were ready each time I made a decision to let them do something on their own, but that my doing so they have naturally matured quicker.

I agree with this. I'm also a parent that tends to allow the child to take the step forwards when I feel they're ready as individuals rather than be swayed by what is seen as "the norm" in their peer group. Some of my friends have thrown absolute freaks at some of the things I've allowed my kids to do, like walking to school at 7 and lighting fires (at Scouts) and using axes ditto, on the other hand they've survived everything so far. And as you say, it gives them confidence in their own abilities and thus more prepared to take the next step.

mumps

I think it would be hard to get statistics to prove effects of leaving a nine year old alone for half an hour occasionally. I am sure there will be studies of children who have been left alone for long periods on a frequent basis but that isn't the same thing.

I can only go by my own observations. I have four grown up children and they have a network of cousins, school friends, university friends etc. I remember two children from primary school who had mothers who were very protective, never let them play in the park, go on school holidays etc. Both have turned into rather nervous adults, is that due to the fact that they are like their mothers, anxious worriers, or is it because they have been affected by their mothers who never thought they were ready for the next step? Who knows.

My four have all told me that the people who got into difficulties in the first year at uni were often the ones who hadn't been very independant prior to uni. They either seemed to suffer from homesickness and didn't mix well or went raving mad at freshers, drinking, drugs and other things. Several got into difficulties with money, although this seemed to happen to quite alot of them. This was at four different universities and applied to people they met at university and people they had gone to school with who went to other universities. This doesn't prove anything but it is interesting, well I think it is.

The other interesting point is some people seem to feel children would be safer in a public place as their friends are with them. I think groups of children are just as likely, maybe more likely, to do something silly than a single child. I got groped in a cinema as a teenager, my DD had a man expose himself to her when she was 11 walking about 100 yds to her friends house with her friend.

The midwife who looked after me in my first pregnancy told me that the thing I needed to remember was that mothers are always in the wrong, the thing I find sad on here is that some people have been quite nasty in their views about other people and that is generally mothers critisising other mothers. Other people have just talked about their own views and experiences. Is it just me or is it the mothers who would never leave a child who have been most judgemental? Perhaps I am just over sensitive or feeling got at or perhaps they feel got at so are defending their views.

All I can say with any certainty is that my four have survived in tact, none of them ever got hurt when left alone or in a group at home without an adult. They all seem quite well adjusted although number 4 is a bit worried as the others all got firsts and is feeling just a bit pressured about his results.

Sorry for the long post and I hope all the moms and days on here with children under 18 make decisions that they are happy with and the results are good. I suppose the only thing we can agree on is that somewhere before they are 18 they need to be gradually given more independence and responsibility. When that is might be harder to agree on.

Justedited to add that it might not have been this thread where people were being judgemental, there are two or three threads about this and I don't have time to read through them all to make sure who said what to who on which thread.

valk_scot

Toto wrote: »

Do you have any evidence to support that claim?

My personal opinion that if a child is is regularly told that they can't do this or prevented from doing that "because it might be dangerous" it makes them more nervy and fearful of potentially dangerous consequences in other unknown situations compared to a child that has been encouraged to stretch themselves a little. Of course that doesn't mean that the parent shouldn't do a bit of quick risk assesment for every proposed new activity and they should definately say no if they (the parent) thinks the child is not ready for it, or the activity does have a high risk of negative consequences.

But the current tendency (not just by parents) is to ban children from doing things if there's any risk at all, no matter how small it may be. I don't belive this encourages confidence and independence in kids, quite the opposite in fact. I think it makes them less likely to be able to cope with future challenges because they've not had the opportunity to develop their self confidence and coping skills, also that they'll be less likely to attempt them because of the skewed thinking on risk perception that they've been exposed to. A lot of this reflects what particular fears and worries that their parents may have of course and that's fair enough, many of these concerns are very valid ones. But one has to be careful not to let this sort of thinking get out of control, to the detriment of the development of the child. Otherwise what do you get? An 18 year old that's never been left home alone or allowed to get the bus into town, who has never been allowed to prepare or cook food, who is nervous of all outdoor physical activities?

Toto

I encourage my kids to do all sorts of things for themselves. They cook, they shop, they repair broken stuff themselves, they look for answers to their questions rather than simply coming to ask me as a first line. They are active and inquisitive and have been taught to problem solve for themselves.

I simply don't leave them home alone at the age of 9. I find the leap of opinion which equates not leaving young children home alone and them being smothered kids who can't wipe their own backsides quite incredible.

valk_scot

Toto wrote: »

I simply don't leave them home alone at the age of 9. I find the leap of opinion which equates not leaving young children home alone and them being smothered kids who can't wipe their own backsides quite incredible.

I think you're reading more into the above few posts than is actually there if you feel that's what's being said. The discussion has moved on a bit from that one particular point to being a bit more general.

zagfles

valk_scot wrote: »

My personal opinion that if a child is is regularly told that they can't do this or prevented from doing that "because it might be dangerous" it makes them more nervy and fearful of potentially dangerous consequences in other unknown situations compared to a child that has been encouraged to stretch themselves a little. Of course that doesn't mean that the parent shouldn't do a bit of quick risk assesment for every proposed new activity and they should definately say no if they (the parent) thinks the child is not ready for it, or the activity does have a high risk of negative consequences.

Yes, and the risk of taking an alternative course of action needs to be considered. For instance in a choice between leaving my 9 year old alone for an hour or taking her out in the car, I know that leaving her home alone was the safer option. May be different with other children of course.

But the current tendency (not just by parents) is to ban children from doing things if there's any risk at all, no matter how small it may be. I don't belive this encourages confidence and independence in kids, quite the opposite in fact. I think it makes them less likely to be able to cope with future challenges because they've not had the opportunity to develop their self confidence and coping skills, also that they'll be less likely to attempt them because of the skewed thinking on risk perception that they've been exposed to.

Yes, and skewed risk assessment can put children at greater danger, for instance by far the biggest risk to children who walk to school alone is traffic. But a child who is more concerned about strangers may worry more about the weird looking man heading towards them than the cars on the road, perhaps crossing where it's unsafe to avoid the stranger etc. You get those who read about a child abduction 250 miles away from their home and then decide it's too dangerous for their child to walk alone, but they read about a 12 year old getting killed in a traffic accident in their own town and that worries them far less!

A lot of this reflects what particular fears and worries that their parents may have of course and that's fair enough, many of these concerns are very valid ones. But one has to be careful not to let this sort of thinking get out of control, to the detriment of the development of the child. Otherwise what do you get? An 18 year old that's never been left home alone or allowed to get the bus into town, who has never been allowed to prepare or cook food, who is nervous of all outdoor physical activities?

Indeed.

jellyhead

mumps wrote: »

I can only go by my own observations. I have four grown up children and they have a network of cousins, school friends, university friends etc. I remember two children from primary school who had mothers who were very protective, never let them play in the park, go on school holidays etc. Both have turned into rather nervous adults, is that due to the fact that they are like their mothers, anxious worriers, or is it because they have been affected by their mothers who never thought they were ready for the next step? Who knows.

I'm one of those anxious worrying type of mothers, but the idea of not letting them go on a school trip is just flabbergasting. I didn't want my eldest to go at the age of 8, but he loved it. I'm even more anxious about my youngest who will also be 8 - he has similar difficulties to eldest but eldest was statemented for special needs so he got some extra consideration while on the trip.

Both boys are summer birthdays with coordination problems and social immaturity, but not quite enough for a diagnosis of aspergers or dyspraxia. It's the food issue that worries me really, I think youngest will cope with everything else. He's getting better at dressing himself and has managed okay with the school swimming lessons.

So, both of mine have been one of the last in the class to do certain things, like going out to the park on their own. But I wouldn't dream of keeping them back from school holidays. If the staff know the mum's a worrier they'll make an effort to reassure them and the child that everything will be okay.

conradmum

FBaby wrote: »

The thing is it's by letting your child alone at home and seeing that they are coping absolutely fine that you gain the full confidence they are ok. So you might start with emergencies and you then move towards short times that are not emergencies. In the meantime the child gets older!

This thread had made me think that it really isn't about being home alone but at which stage we are comfortable with giving more responsibilities to our children. For instance, when were they allowed to walk in front without holding hands, when were they allowed to use a knife etc... I realise that as a whole I let my kids do all these things earlier than most of my friends with their children.

Many here would probably say I have been lucky that both my children have not once sustained an accident as a result. I don't agree, I believe they were ready each time I made a decision to let them do something on their own, but that my doing so they have naturally matured quicker.

I think I've been the same as you and have allowed my children to do things at an earlier age than normal. They've all grown up to be quite fearless, though whether that's coincidence or not of course I don't know.

I've met, taught and known children from many different countries and it's been my experience that British teenagers are the most immature by far. I once had the misfortune to teach a class of British 16 year olds and their behaviour was that of children 5 or 6 years younger. I couldn't imagine any of them holding down full time jobs as their grandparents did. As was said before, other cultures tend to expect more of children at an earlier age. I do believe these phenomena are linked.

One central truth about children is that respond strongly to adults' expectations of them. They need to be trusted and given responsibilities so that they can believe themselves to be trustworthy and responsible. At what age parents should do this depends on the child, but the earlier the better imo.