WWTBAM Bored

...who lets her young kids walk by themselves in the neighborhood.

And she's getting backlash for doing this? And is being investigated for neglect?

Definitely a generational thing- I walked everywhere from kindergarten, supervised only by my brother who was only two years older than me (and by the time I was in first grade, I didn't even get that supervision).

The danger from child abduction and the like is very low- and I don't believe it has dramatically increased since I was a kid- this is a bunch of crap.

Maybe if her neighbors agreed to watch out for her kids when they're walking instead of turning them into the authorities...

All the kids in my neighborhood walked a couple of miles down and back up a very steep hill to the store. We all played in the street unsupervised. I have a piece of bone missing under my right eyebrow, however, the result of falling off a cliff.

Bob Juch wrote:All the kids in my neighborhood walked a couple of miles down and back up a very steep hill to the store. We all played in the street unsupervised. I have a piece of bone missing under my right eyebrow, however, the result of falling off a cliff.

Ah...that explains your posts.

Bob Juch wrote:I have a piece of bone missing under my right eyebrow, however, the result of falling off a cliff.

Well that explains everything.....

lb13

Dammit Jeemie!!!!

lb13

I was appalled at the treatment she and her husband received by the "authorities". The threat of taking her kids away if she didn't sign a paper, talking to her kids without her knowledge and approval and scaring the kids. They must have a play book because this is what they do to elderly people when someone wants to be their guardian. They need to concentrate on kids (elderly) in real danger that need help immediately. It is abuse of authority to force someone to do what they want with a threat. Humm I wonder how much legal fees will be.

The danger from child abduction is persistent. Having said that, when do you let the kid off the leash? Literally, in some cases. I see a lot tiny-tots being lead around here in packs, all leashed together on elastic pulls, head of leash held by harried tot-school folks. Obviously, this is a good way not to have tots dashing off into the streets.


At some point you've got to let them do stuff on their own. But highly televised tests have shown that little kids can listen to lectures & demos that hit on all the salient points, then stop at the 1st stranger with a puppy who is inviting them to pet it, etc.


As a girl scout I was sent out to knock on doors of people who came to the door in their underwear & didn't want to buy cookies. No harm done. It didn't exactly inspire me to a life in sales, though. I'm envious of later-day girl scouts who got to sell their cookies as the full troop in mall parking lots. We were told we couldn't do that. (I would guess there were laws forbidding it, in Ohio at least, at the time). We had to take orders for cookies that would ship weeks later, & were given no samples to distribute.


And yeah, I fell out of a tree in unsupervised play. I could have broken my back. All that happened was all the wind got knocked out of me, quite literally. Doesn't "explain anything", but I guess that's what you gotta do if you want that.

ghostjmf wrote:The danger from child abduction is persistent.

I'm not sure what this means, exactly. But the danger from child abduction by strangers, which is what we're talking about here, while nonzero, is vanishingly small.

In my neighborhood, it was the adults who were afraid to walk down the street.

There are some interesting new projects being started in other countries to investigate whether kids might possibly be too sheltered.