What age do you let your children out alone?

missbiggles1

pigpen wrote: »

but they don't spend most time at home.. mine are awake at home about 4-5 hours a day and 6.5 at school or longer in private nurseries or with childminders.. in the street you hold their hand or toddlers are in a pushchair.. not much they can get up to.

I reckon 90% of the childhood accidents are between 6-8pm.. bed time!! lol.

Picking out the bits you want doesn't mean the stats are wrong.. go speak to a childrens A&E nurse.. of the 11 times mine have been to A&E 2 were illness and 2 at school... the rest were all in the house happenings..

An A&E nurse will, by definition, see children who have had accidents - that makes their viewpoint valid but atypical. Regarding hours spent in the home, you seem to have conveniently forgotten the 24/30 hours they're awake at the weekend and the 15 weeks they aren't even in school at all!

pigpen

missbiggles1 wrote: »

An A&E nurse will, by definition, see children who have had accidents - that makes their viewpoint valid but atypical. Regarding hours spent in the home, you seem to have conveniently forgotten the 24/30 hours they're awake at the weekend and the 15 weeks they aren't even in school at all!

And the staff ask how and where the accident happened so they can get a very good idea of what proportion of accidents occur at home or elsewhere.. Our paeds A&E has a chart thing on the wall highlighting the percentage of accidents in the home to show parents they need to be vigilant.

I never forget anything.. I just didn't want to overwhelm anyones brain with too much info.

I have 4 friends who are A&E nurses.. and the stats support my statement.. and the staff loathe trampolines and think they should be banned!

Jagraf

silvercar wrote: »

The presence of the 14 year old is to make it safer for the 5 year old without taking total responsibility. The 14 year old is old enough to offer behaviour guidance and to summon help when necessary.

Remember within 2 years that 14 year old will be deemed old enough to do all sorts of things including having a baby of their own.

So you are suggesting that a 14 year old takes some responsibility but not all. So you are leaving a five year old in the hands of someone partly responsible for them.

Within two years they can have their own child and be responsible for their own child (not being dumped with someone else's). And they are 16, not 14 and not 15. Imagine that argument when driving a car two years early.

I do agree that the older the teen gets they can get up to all sorts. Even more reason to think about consequences.

Lunar_Eclipse

Yes, I would/did allow both of my children to do this or something similar. It really depends on the children though. I have two girls. Their teachers have always commented on how mature they are; it's relative because they are the only children I know really, really well. But they have always been 'sensible', whilst accepting that of course accidents can happen and people make poor choices from time to time.

I always expected them to behave appropriately, and put hours in to teaching them about road safety, how to deal with different emergencies, bike safety on roads etc etc. This helps ensure they have the skills needed to be independent.

Given this, I find comments such as 'lazy parenting' to be quite ironic, although I have seen that type of parenting behaviour so understand why someone might think it. However, there are two types of parents allowing their children to act in this way: those that take their role as a parent seriously and teach their children how to behave independently, and those who are 'lazy'.

I have plenty of highly paid professional friends whose children have got themselves up, ready and to school by themselves from the age of about 7. Both parents are typically incredibly organised, their homes are immaculate and everything runs to a schedule. And then you meet others who aren't even washing their own hair or getting their own breakfast at the age of 10 or 11. If we look at the competency levels of adults, we can see that some children never grow up/aren't helped to grow up. It takes all sorts. :-)

theoretica

Jagraf wrote: »

So you are suggesting that a 14 year old takes some responsibility but not all. So you are leaving a five year old in the hands of someone partly responsible for them.

Within two years they can have their own child and be responsible for their own child (not being dumped with someone else's). And they are 16, not 14 and not 15. Imagine that argument when driving a car two years early.

I do agree that the older the teen gets they can get up to all sorts. Even more reason to think about consequences.

I like the concept of partial responsibility - responsible for carrying through plans, but not for thinking them out.

bylromarha

Not read through it all, but surely some kids aged 14 are more than capable to babysit. Some adults aged 20 are not.

I look at the people in charge and judge on their life skills if I want them looking after my littlies - there's a 34 year old man I can think of who keeps offering to babysit for us. Never will he be alone in a house with my two.

FBaby

This is so true, I would have felt safer leaving my children together and eldest to look after her brother at a younger age than under the care of my father, who is perfectly responsible for himself, but not so much with children.

There was the time when I left DS who was under 5 with him whilst I went shopping. There's a swimming pool in the garden, so my dad being responsible attached an alarm so that if someone falls in the pool, it rings. That provided me with reassurance....except that when I came back, the alarm was blaring, and when I found my dad (after checking with panic that my son wasn't floating in it) and he was totally oblivious to it, being in the other side of the property and a bit deaf!

Adults are not always more capable of being responsible than teenagers, maybe because they are more confident in believing that they are and therefore maybe less observant.

Jagraf

I'm sure there are many teens who show a great deal of responsibility for their age.

I just don't think that is their role as a child to be responsible for another child.

if a parent leaves an older child with a younger one, on the basis that they wouldnt leave the younger one on their own, they are by default making that older child responsible for the welfare of the younger one (however it is dressed up).

MERFE

My older 2 girl age 11 boy nearly 10 are allowed to the park alone and over to the allotment to check for eggs or make sure the chickens have enough water. Both places are about 1 min walk from the house. Before we moved here they walked to and from school alone. I wanted to allow them to do that before my youngest started school so I wasn't with them because when they go to secondary they have to go by bus as I'll be taking the youngest to school. I wanted them to be confident without an adult always there. Now we have moved the school coach for secondary stops right outside our house so a bit less of a concern than where we were before. The youngest is not allowed anywhere alone, if he is in the front garden (its bigger than the back) I am in the kitchen watching him or out there with him. He is 5. I cant see him being allowed to the park alone till at least 8. The kids don't go knocking for friends because its fairly rural here and even the closest friend is a bit of a walk along a road with no path. The older 2 have struggled a little with this because they did knock for a few friends and played out the front before we moved here, moved in Nov.

Jagraf

theoretica wrote: »

I like the concept of partial responsibility - responsible for carrying through plans, but not for thinking them out.

so not using initiative then?