I referenced a story in a post a couple months ago about a mother who caught hell for letting her 9 year old son ride the subway alone in New York. Salon.com has an interview with the mother, who has released a new book, “Free Range Kids.” Here’s the article: Stop Worrying About Your Children.
Some great quotes from the interview:
If you were a child in the ’70s or the ’80s and were allowed to go visit your friend down the block, or ride your bike to the library, or play in the park without your parents accompanying you, your children are no less safe than you were.
But it feels so completely different, and we’re told that it’s completely different, and frankly, when I tell people that it’s the same, nobody believes me. We’re living in really safe times, and it’s hard to believe.
Another one, which is exactly the point I made previously… (my older sister used to walk me home when I was in kindergarten, and she was in 3rd grade)
Maybe the 7-year-old will walk the 5-year-old home, and nobody would say: “Oh my God, where are the parents? Let’s arrest them.” Perhaps your child is in .00007 percent more danger, but the danger is so minute to begin with. There is a 1 in 1.5 million chance that your kid would be abducted and killed by a stranger. It is hard to wrap your mind around those numbers, and everybody always assumes: What if it’s my 1 in 1.5 million?
If you don’t want to have your child in any kind of danger, you really can’t do anything. You certainly couldn’t drive them in a car, because that’s the No. 1 way kids die, as passengers in car accidents.
I realize that this could seem antithetical to my Papi Nuevo researchaholicism, such as the recent posts I’ve made about trying to find phthlate-free and PBA-free plastics. But here’s my current outlook and where I make the (however thin) distinction: There are tangible things I know I can protect my child from: harfmul chemicals like those found in plastics, baby wipes, lotions, creams, etc. And there are conceptual things that I could only hope to protect my child from, but that I have no control over: like playing outdoors.
Example: the odds of my child choking on a chicken bone are probably 1 in 1.5 million as well. Should I prevent my child from eating chicken? No. Should I research the chicken brand I feed my family to make sure it is free of hormones and toxins? Yes. I can prevent hormones from getting into a child’s body. I can’t prevent them from choking on a chicken. However, I can give them the tools to eat slowly, be careful with chicken bones, not talk to strangers, run if somebody talks to you, etc. (I just mixed my analogies, but you see where I’m going with this.)
I hope that I am part of a group of parents who were children in the 70s and 80s, who are returning to the concept of “let them play outside.” Hopefully the cultural pendulum is swinging back in favor of teaching responsibility and independence. Last point I love:
And when I say: “Walk to school,” you’re thinking, What about that girl in the trailer park in California who was walking to her friend’s house the other day? [Sandra Cantu, 8, of Tracy, was murdered in late March 2009. The chief suspect is the child's Sunday school teacher, who is also the mother of one of the girl's friends.] That’s the image you have. You get despairing and worried, and then you remember afterward there was probably some expert on TV saying: “Parents, here are some tips for you.”
As if there is a tip that can tell you, “Remember parents: Don’t ever let your child out of the house to go visit a playmate.” That’s what the tip would be, and it wouldn’t make any sense. Preparing for such unlikely scenarios is like preparing for, “Remember parents: Asteroids happen, so keep your children inside!”
But of course, as I’ve said previously, I reserve the right to totally change my opinion on all of this, and be one of those parents who buys knee pads to make crawling safer.
Posted by Manchild
Tummy Tub!
Posted by Manchild
Posted by Manchild