Given all the 'risk to children' posts....
by konark_girl
04/15/2008, 4:17 PM #
Here's an interesting one. So many of us may not like children being endangered for parental religious beliefs, but what about putting children in somewhat risky situations to make them 'ready for the world' and not to 'over-coddle' them? I'm sure if tons of parents started doing this, there might be a 'modest increase in child mortality' (a line that drew some heat in another post), but the q. is, would it also be an improvement in quality of life for most of today's kids?
*****************************************************************
Why I Let My 9-Year-Old Ride the Subway Alone
By LENORE SKENAZY | April 4, 2008
I left my 9-year-old at Bloomingdale’s (the original one) a couple weeks ago. Last seen, he was in first floor handbags as I sashayed out the door.
Bye-bye. Have fun.
And he did. He came home on the subway and bus by himself.
Was I worried? Yes, a tinge. But it didn’t strike me as that daring, either. Isn’t New York as safe now as it was in 1963? It’s not like we’re living in downtown Baghdad.
Anyway, for weeks my boy had been begging for me to please leave him somewhere, anywhere, and let him try to figure out how to get home on his own. So on that sunny Sunday I gave him a subway map, a MetroCard, a $20 bill, and several quarters, just in case he had to make a call.
No, I did not give him a cell phone. Didn’t want to lose it. And no, I didn’t trail him, like a mommy private eye. I trusted him to figure out that he should take the Lexington Avenue subway down, and the 34th Street crosstown bus home. If he couldn’t do that, I trusted him to ask a stranger. And then I even trusted that stranger not to think, “Gee, I was about to catch my train home, but now I think I’ll abduct this adorable child instead.”
Long story short: My son got home, ecstatic with independence.
Long story longer, and analyzed, to boot: Half the people I’ve told this episode to now want to turn me in for child abuse. As if keeping kids under lock and key and helmet and cell phone and nanny and surveillance is the right way to rear kids. It’s not. It’s debilitating — for us and for them.
And yet —
“How would you have felt if he didn’t come home?” a New Jersey mom of four, Vicki Garfinkle, asked.
Guess what, Ms. Garfinkle: I’d have been devastated. But would that just prove that no mom should ever let her child ride the subway alone?
No. It would just be one more awful but extremely rare example of random violence, the kind that hyper parents cite as proof that every day in every way our children are more and more vulnerable.
“Carlie Brucia — I don’t know if you’re familiar with that case or not, but she was in Florida and she did a cut-through about a mile from her house … and midday, at 11 in the morning, she was abducted by a guy who violated her several times, killed her, and left her behind a church.”
That’s the story that the head of safetynet4kids.com, Katharine Francis, immediately told me when I asked her what she thought of my son getting around on his own. She runs a company that makes wallet-sized copies of a child’s photo and fingerprints, just in case.
Well of course I know the story of Carlie Brucia. That’s the problem. We all know that story — and the one about the Mormon girl in Utah and the one about the little girl in Spain — and because we do, we all run those tapes in our heads when we think of leaving our kids on their own. We even run a tape of how we’d look on Larry King.
“I do not want to be the one on TV explaining my daughter’s disappearance,” a father, Garth Chouteau, said when we were talking about the subway issue.
These days, when a kid dies, the world — i.e., cable TV — blames the parents. It’s simple as that. And yet, Trevor Butterworth, a spokesman for the research center STATS.org, said, “The statistics show that this is an incredibly rare event, and you can’t protect people from very rare events. It would be like trying to create a shield against being struck by lightning.”
Justice Department data actually show the number of children abducted by strangers has been going down over the years. So why not let your kids get home from school by themselves?
“Parents are in the grip of anxiety and when you’re anxious, you’re totally warped,” the author of “A Nation of Wimps,” Hara Estroff Marano, said. We become so bent out of shape over something as simple as letting your children out of sight on the playground that it starts seeming on par with letting them play on the railroad tracks at night. In the rain. In dark non-reflective coats.
The problem with this everything-is-dangerous outlook is that over-protectiveness is a danger in and of itself. A child who thinks he can’t do anything on his own eventually can’t.
Meantime, my son wants his next trip to be from Queens. In my day, I doubt that would have struck anyone as particularly brave. Now it seems like hitchhiking through Yemen.
Here’s your MetroCard, kid. Go.
|
Re: Given all the 'risk to children' posts....
by Boss Greer
04/15/2008, 4:27 PM #
I agree with this.
But it's terribly hard to put it in practice. At least for me.
|
Right on!
by einhverfr
04/15/2008, 4:33 PM #
Glad to see some good parents are out there making a stand for actually teaching children how to function in the world!
Let no one overshelter his child ever
Nor defend him when one should not
For harms do oft when from the house goes
Become greater if one is ill prepared
Ok, I made that one up but it is in the same tradition as the sayings in Havamal.
|
Re: Given all the 'risk to children' posts....
by bugger
04/15/2008, 4:39 PM #
Nine seems a little young. For me there's a risk/reward here... Isn't there a better way to give your kids confidence than chucking them out on the streets of New York?
I suppose everyone's trying to find a middle ground between coddling their children and acting like a negligent moron... this seems closer to the latter than the former.
|
Re: Given all the 'risk to children' posts....
by einhverfr
04/15/2008, 4:43 PM #
When I was 9, it wouldn't have been a problem for me. It might depend on the kid though.
The big thing is that your kid needs to know what to do if he gets lost regardless if age. I don't think 9 is too young at all. Just remember that accidents when you are not expecting them are more likely to be dangerous then malice.
|
Re: Given all the 'risk to children' posts....
by silent.observer
04/15/2008, 4:56 PM #
bugger:
Nine seems a little young. For me there's a risk/reward here... Isn't there a better way to give your kids confidence than chucking them out on the streets of New York?
I suppose everyone's trying to find a middle ground between coddling their children and acting like a negligent moron... this seems closer to the latter than the former.
Nine for me is a bit hazy, must be getting old. It may depend on the kid as to how ready they might be for wandering the city streets solo.
But as far as 'America's Worst Mom?' there, her rep has as much to do what she did as her cavalier attitude about it. The article was begging to be attacked. Considering the publicity and the new blog she has, perhaps she got what she wanted.
It is true, though, how so much of the cable news cycle is geared towards frightening people. It didn't exist when I was a kid running home from school. This seeming constant refrain of children and hot blondes meeting with horrible fates, has it trained more fear into us?
|
Re: Given all the 'risk to children' posts....
by PhysicsGirl
04/15/2008, 4:57 PM #
I think that these sorts of things have to be analyzed as risks versus rewards (including future risks and future rewards). The relative value of these two things is what dictates whether an action is problematic to me. Letting a child play at the part by themselves may increase their risk of stranger abduction (already a small chance) by a very small amount. But if the reward is a healthier and more independent child, which lowers the risk of problems later, than I would think this is worth it.
|
Re: Given all the 'risk to children' posts....
by einhverfr
04/15/2008, 5:11 PM #
On a related note, it is interesting to watch my wife and I argue over issues relating to possible injury to our son. She was relatively sheltered (and I would not ask her to find her way home on the subway because she cannot read a map still), and I am the sort of person who when I was eight would set out on foot to family friends' houses several miles away.
So my son falls off something, gets a scrape, etc. I don't like to see him hurt but at the same time, I recognize that this has a positive role in keeping him from being seriously injured. My wife used to get horribly upset by me letting him get scraped up from time to time. After he did get hurt badly enough to go to the hospital once she started to change her mind and see things my way. He pulled down a quart of boiling water on himself and got some pretty good second-degree burns on his shoulder, arm, and back. He did this specifically because he was angry at me and figured that if he made a mess, that would show me. Well, he got hurt, and spent two weeks with good-size bandages on. He is still embarrassed about the incident over six months later.
After that incident, my wife has come to understand that minor injuries reinforce safe limit in his mind, and thus keep him from doing other stupid things.
So what I am saying is that the act of oversheltering a child can have unforeseen and sometimes even tragic consequences. Fortunately my son was not seriously hurt in that case, but he could have been. Suppose it had been hot oil instead of water in the pot?
I believe in doing what one can to shield from serious harm. But often this means ensuring that the child has knowledge of what to do in an unfortunate situation.
Better burden bearest thou nowise
Than shrewd head upon thy shoulders
In good stead it will stand among stranger folk
And a shield when unsheltered thou art.
Havamal stanza 10.
|
Re: Given all the 'risk to children' posts....
by Nanotech
04/15/2008, 5:55 PM #
konark_girl:
Here's an interesting one. So many of us may not like children being endangered for parental religious beliefs, but what about putting children in somewhat risky situations to make them 'ready for the world' and not to 'over-coddle' them? I'm sure if tons of parents started doing this, there might be a 'modest increase in child mortality' (a line that drew some heat in another post), but the q. is, would it also be an improvement in quality of life for most of today's kids?
***************************************************************** Why I Let My 9-Year-Old Ride the Subway Alone By LENORE SKENAZY | April 4, 2008
I left my 9-year-old at Bloomingdale’s (the original one) a couple weeks ago. Last seen, he was in first floor handbags as I sashayed out the door.
Bye-bye. Have fun.
And he did. He came home on the subway and bus by himself.
Was I worried? Yes, a tinge. But it didn’t strike me as that daring, either. Isn’t New York as safe now as it was in 1963? It’s not like we’re living in downtown Baghdad.
Anyway, for weeks my boy had been begging for me to please leave him somewhere, anywhere, and let him try to figure out how to get home on his own. So on that sunny Sunday I gave him a subway map, a MetroCard, a $20 bill, and several quarters, just in case he had to make a call.
No, I did not give him a cell phone. Didn’t want to lose it. And no, I didn’t trail him, like a mommy private eye. I trusted him to figure out that he should take the Lexington Avenue subway down, and the 34th Street crosstown bus home. If he couldn’t do that, I trusted him to ask a stranger. And then I even trusted that stranger not to think, “Gee, I was about to catch my train home, but now I think I’ll abduct this adorable child instead.”
Long story short: My son got home, ecstatic with independence.
Long story longer, and analyzed, to boot: Half the people I’ve told this episode to now want to turn me in for child abuse. As if keeping kids under lock and key and helmet and cell phone and nanny and surveillance is the right way to rear kids. It’s not. It’s debilitating — for us and for them.
And yet —
“How would you have felt if he didn’t come home?” a New Jersey mom of four, Vicki Garfinkle, asked.
Guess what, Ms. Garfinkle: I’d have been devastated. But would that just prove that no mom should ever let her child ride the subway alone?
No. It would just be one more awful but extremely rare example of random violence, the kind that hyper parents cite as proof that every day in every way our children are more and more vulnerable.
“Carlie Brucia — I don’t know if you’re familiar with that case or not, but she was in Florida and she did a cut-through about a mile from her house … and midday, at 11 in the morning, she was abducted by a guy who violated her several times, killed her, and left her behind a church.”
That’s the story that the head of safetynet4kids.com, Katharine Francis, immediately told me when I asked her what she thought of my son getting around on his own. She runs a company that makes wallet-sized copies of a child’s photo and fingerprints, just in case.
Well of course I know the story of Carlie Brucia. That’s the problem. We all know that story — and the one about the Mormon girl in Utah and the one about the little girl in Spain — and because we do, we all run those tapes in our heads when we think of leaving our kids on their own. We even run a tape of how we’d look on Larry King.
“I do not want to be the one on TV explaining my daughter’s disappearance,” a father, Garth Chouteau, said when we were talking about the subway issue.
These days, when a kid dies, the world — i.e., cable TV — blames the parents. It’s simple as that. And yet, Trevor Butterworth, a spokesman for the research center STATS.org, said, “The statistics show that this is an incredibly rare event, and you can’t protect people from very rare events. It would be like trying to create a shield against being struck by lightning.”
Justice Department data actually show the number of children abducted by strangers has been going down over the years. So why not let your kids get home from school by themselves?
“Parents are in the grip of anxiety and when you’re anxious, you’re totally warped,” the author of “A Nation of Wimps,” Hara Estroff Marano, said. We become so bent out of shape over something as simple as letting your children out of sight on the playground that it starts seeming on par with letting them play on the railroad tracks at night. In the rain. In dark non-reflective coats.
The problem with this everything-is-dangerous outlook is that over-protectiveness is a danger in and of itself. A child who thinks he can’t do anything on his own eventually can’t.
Meantime, my son wants his next trip to be from Queens. In my day, I doubt that would have struck anyone as particularly brave. Now it seems like hitchhiking through Yemen.
Here’s your MetroCard, kid. Go.
Stupid.
|
You would be found guilty and negligent.
by Sovereign8
04/15/2008, 6:12 PM #
That's my bet if :
1. Someone rats you out to the cops or a city agency.
or
2. Something had happened to the kid.
or
3. The kid had asked a cop or subway worker or maybe even a pedestrian for help.
Then AFTER the charges being filed and the lawyers getting on your case:
4. Your expenses would reach over $1 Million.
and
5. You'd do significant time.
|
Re: Given all the 'risk to children' posts....
by anxiousmofo
04/15/2008, 6:27 PM #
Nanotech: konark_girl:
Here's an interesting one. So many of us may not like children being endangered for parental religious beliefs, but what about putting children in somewhat risky situations to make them 'ready for the world' and not to 'over-coddle' them? I'm sure if tons of parents started doing this, there might be a 'modest increase in child mortality' (a line that drew some heat in another post), but the q. is, would it also be an improvement in quality of life for most of today's kids?
***************************************************************** Why I Let My 9-Year-Old Ride the Subway Alone By LENORE SKENAZY | April 4, 2008
I left my 9-year-old at Bloomingdale’s (the original one) a couple weeks ago. Last seen, he was in first floor handbags as I sashayed out the door.
Bye-bye. Have fun.
And he did. He came home on the subway and bus by himself.
Was I worried? Yes, a tinge. But it didn’t strike me as that daring, either. Isn’t New York as safe now as it was in 1963? It’s not like we’re living in downtown Baghdad.
Anyway, for weeks my boy had been begging for me to please leave him somewhere, anywhere, and let him try to figure out how to get home on his own. So on that sunny Sunday I gave him a subway map, a MetroCard, a $20 bill, and several quarters, just in case he had to make a call.
No, I did not give him a cell phone. Didn’t want to lose it. And no, I didn’t trail him, like a mommy private eye. I trusted him to figure out that he should take the Lexington Avenue subway down, and the 34th Street crosstown bus home. If he couldn’t do that, I trusted him to ask a stranger. And then I even trusted that stranger not to think, “Gee, I was about to catch my train home, but now I think I’ll abduct this adorable child instead.”
Long story short: My son got home, ecstatic with independence.
Long story longer, and analyzed, to boot: Half the people I’ve told this episode to now want to turn me in for child abuse. As if keeping kids under lock and key and helmet and cell phone and nanny and surveillance is the right way to rear kids. It’s not. It’s debilitating — for us and for them.
And yet —
“How would you have felt if he didn’t come home?” a New Jersey mom of four, Vicki Garfinkle, asked.
Guess what, Ms. Garfinkle: I’d have been devastated. But would that just prove that no mom should ever let her child ride the subway alone?
No. It would just be one more awful but extremely rare example of random violence, the kind that hyper parents cite as proof that every day in every way our children are more and more vulnerable.
“Carlie Brucia — I don’t know if you’re familiar with that case or not, but she was in Florida and she did a cut-through about a mile from her house … and midday, at 11 in the morning, she was abducted by a guy who violated her several times, killed her, and left her behind a church.”
That’s the story that the head of safetynet4kids.com, Katharine Francis, immediately told me when I asked her what she thought of my son getting around on his own. She runs a company that makes wallet-sized copies of a child’s photo and fingerprints, just in case.
Well of course I know the story of Carlie Brucia. That’s the problem. We all know that story — and the one about the Mormon girl in Utah and the one about the little girl in Spain — and because we do, we all run those tapes in our heads when we think of leaving our kids on their own. We even run a tape of how we’d look on Larry King.
“I do not want to be the one on TV explaining my daughter’s disappearance,” a father, Garth Chouteau, said when we were talking about the subway issue.
These days, when a kid dies, the world — i.e., cable TV — blames the parents. It’s simple as that. And yet, Trevor Butterworth, a spokesman for the research center STATS.org, said, “The statistics show that this is an incredibly rare event, and you can’t protect people from very rare events. It would be like trying to create a shield against being struck by lightning.”
Justice Department data actually show the number of children abducted by strangers has been going down over the years. So why not let your kids get home from school by themselves?
“Parents are in the grip of anxiety and when you’re anxious, you’re totally warped,” the author of “A Nation of Wimps,” Hara Estroff Marano, said. We become so bent out of shape over something as simple as letting your children out of sight on the playground that it starts seeming on par with letting them play on the railroad tracks at night. In the rain. In dark non-reflective coats.
The problem with this everything-is-dangerous outlook is that over-protectiveness is a danger in and of itself. A child who thinks he can’t do anything on his own eventually can’t.
Meantime, my son wants his next trip to be from Queens. In my day, I doubt that would have struck anyone as particularly brave. Now it seems like hitchhiking through Yemen.
Here’s your MetroCard, kid. Go.
Stupid.
It's a good thing that you quoted the entire post before putting in your one-word comment, as it makes the discussion easier to follow. See what I mean?
|
Re: Given all the 'risk to children' posts....
by Nanotech
04/15/2008, 6:51 PM #
Nanotech: konark_girl:
Here's an interesting one. So many of us may not like children being endangered for parental religious beliefs, but what about putting children in somewhat risky situations to make them 'ready for the world' and not to 'over-coddle' them? I'm sure if tons of parents started doing this, there might be a 'modest increase in child mortality' (a line that drew some heat in another post), but the q. is, would it also be an improvement in quality of life for most of today's kids?
***************************************************************** Why I Let My 9-Year-Old Ride the Subway Alone By LENORE SKENAZY | April 4, 2008
I left my 9-year-old at Bloomingdale’s (the original one) a couple weeks ago. Last seen, he was in first floor handbags as I sashayed out the door.
Bye-bye. Have fun.
And he did. He came home on the subway and bus by himself.
Was I worried? Yes, a tinge. But it didn’t strike me as that daring, either. Isn’t New York as safe now as it was in 1963? It’s not like we’re living in downtown Baghdad.
Anyway, for weeks my boy had been begging for me to please leave him somewhere, anywhere, and let him try to figure out how to get home on his own. So on that sunny Sunday I gave him a subway map, a MetroCard, a $20 bill, and several quarters, just in case he had to make a call.
No, I did not give him a cell phone. Didn’t want to lose it. And no, I didn’t trail him, like a mommy private eye. I trusted him to figure out that he should take the Lexington Avenue subway down, and the 34th Street crosstown bus home. If he couldn’t do that, I trusted him to ask a stranger. And then I even trusted that stranger not to think, “Gee, I was about to catch my train home, but now I think I’ll abduct this adorable child instead.”
Long story short: My son got home, ecstatic with independence.
Long story longer, and analyzed, to boot: Half the people I’ve told this episode to now want to turn me in for child abuse. As if keeping kids under lock and key and helmet and cell phone and nanny and surveillance is the right way to rear kids. It’s not. It’s debilitating — for us and for them.
And yet —
“How would you have felt if he didn’t come home?” a New Jersey mom of four, Vicki Garfinkle, asked.
Guess what, Ms. Garfinkle: I’d have been devastated. But would that just prove that no mom should ever let her child ride the subway alone?
No. It would just be one more awful but extremely rare example of random violence, the kind that hyper parents cite as proof that every day in every way our children are more and more vulnerable.
“Carlie Brucia — I don’t know if you’re familiar with that case or not, but she was in Florida and she did a cut-through about a mile from her house … and midday, at 11 in the morning, she was abducted by a guy who violated her several times, killed her, and left her behind a church.”
That’s the story that the head of safetynet4kids.com, Katharine Francis, immediately told me when I asked her what she thought of my son getting around on his own. She runs a company that makes wallet-sized copies of a child’s photo and fingerprints, just in case.
Well of course I know the story of Carlie Brucia. That’s the problem. We all know that story — and the one about the Mormon girl in Utah and the one about the little girl in Spain — and because we do, we all run those tapes in our heads when we think of leaving our kids on their own. We even run a tape of how we’d look on Larry King.
“I do not want to be the one on TV explaining my daughter’s disappearance,” a father, Garth Chouteau, said when we were talking about the subway issue.
These days, when a kid dies, the world — i.e., cable TV — blames the parents. It’s simple as that. And yet, Trevor Butterworth, a spokesman for the research center STATS.org, said, “The statistics show that this is an incredibly rare event, and you can’t protect people from very rare events. It would be like trying to create a shield against being struck by lightning.”
Justice Department data actually show the number of children abducted by strangers has been going down over the years. So why not let your kids get home from school by themselves?
“Parents are in the grip of anxiety and when you’re anxious, you’re totally warped,” the author of “A Nation of Wimps,” Hara Estroff Marano, said. We become so bent out of shape over something as simple as letting your children out of sight on the playground that it starts seeming on par with letting them play on the railroad tracks at night. In the rain. In dark non-reflective coats.
The problem with this everything-is-dangerous outlook is that over-protectiveness is a danger in and of itself. A child who thinks he can’t do anything on his own eventually can’t.
Meantime, my son wants his next trip to be from Queens. In my day, I doubt that would have struck anyone as particularly brave. Now it seems like hitchhiking through Yemen.
Here’s your MetroCard, kid. Go.
Stupid.
Unlike India, children are valued here. They only have one life, taking chances with thet one life is stupid. They grow up fast enought.
|
Re: You would be found guilty and negligent.
by einhverfr
04/15/2008, 6:57 PM #
Assuming you are correct, and IANAL....
That is a pretty sad statement about our society.
|
Re: Given all the 'risk to children' posts....
by Th Paine
04/15/2008, 7:40 PM #
Right On!
The fear of stranger abduction is totally blown all out of proportion.
|
Re: Given all the 'risk to children' posts....
by bugger
04/15/2008, 7:56 PM #
Nanotech: Nanotech: konark_girl:
Here's an interesting one. So many of us may not like children being endangered for parental religious beliefs, but what about putting children in somewhat risky situations to make them 'ready for the world' and not to 'over-coddle' them? I'm sure if tons of parents started doing this, there might be a 'modest increase in child mortality' (a line that drew some heat in another post), but the q. is, would it also be an improvement in quality of life for most of today's kids?
***************************************************************** Why I Let My 9-Year-Old Ride the Subway Alone By LENORE SKENAZY | April 4, 2008
I left my 9-year-old at Bloomingdale’s (the original one) a couple weeks ago. Last seen, he was in first floor handbags as I sashayed out the door.
Bye-bye. Have fun.
And he did. He came home on the subway and bus by himself.
Was I worried? Yes, a tinge. But it didn’t strike me as that daring, either. Isn’t New York as safe now as it was in 1963? It’s not like we’re living in downtown Baghdad.
Anyway, for weeks my boy had been begging for me to please leave him somewhere, anywhere, and let him try to figure out how to get home on his own. So on that sunny Sunday I gave him a subway map, a MetroCard, a $20 bill, and several quarters, just in case he had to make a call.
No, I did not give him a cell phone. Didn’t want to lose it. And no, I didn’t trail him, like a mommy private eye. I trusted him to figure out that he should take the Lexington Avenue subway down, and the 34th Street crosstown bus home. If he couldn’t do that, I trusted him to ask a stranger. And then I even trusted that stranger not to think, “Gee, I was about to catch my train home, but now I think I’ll abduct this adorable child instead.”
Long story short: My son got home, ecstatic with independence.
Long story longer, and analyzed, to boot: Half the people I’ve told this episode to now want to turn me in for child abuse. As if keeping kids under lock and key and helmet and cell phone and nanny and surveillance is the right way to rear kids. It’s not. It’s debilitating — for us and for them.
And yet —
“How would you have felt if he didn’t come home?” a New Jersey mom of four, Vicki Garfinkle, asked.
Guess what, Ms. Garfinkle: I’d have been devastated. But would that just prove that no mom should ever let her child ride the subway alone?
No. It would just be one more awful but extremely rare example of random violence, the kind that hyper parents cite as proof that every day in every way our children are more and more vulnerable.
“Carlie Brucia — I don’t know if you’re familiar with that case or not, but she was in Florida and she did a cut-through about a mile from her house … and midday, at 11 in the morning, she was abducted by a guy who violated her several times, killed her, and left her behind a church.”
That’s the story that the head of safetynet4kids.com, Katharine Francis, immediately told me when I asked her what she thought of my son getting around on his own. She runs a company that makes wallet-sized copies of a child’s photo and fingerprints, just in case.
Well of course I know the story of Carlie Brucia. That’s the problem. We all know that story — and the one about the Mormon girl in Utah and the one about the little girl in Spain — and because we do, we all run those tapes in our heads when we think of leaving our kids on their own. We even run a tape of how we’d look on Larry King.
“I do not want to be the one on TV explaining my daughter’s disappearance,” a father, Garth Chouteau, said when we were talking about the subway issue.
These days, when a kid dies, the world — i.e., cable TV — blames the parents. It’s simple as that. And yet, Trevor Butterworth, a spokesman for the research center STATS.org, said, “The statistics show that this is an incredibly rare event, and you can’t protect people from very rare events. It would be like trying to create a shield against being struck by lightning.”
Justice Department data actually show the number of children abducted by strangers has been going down over the years. So why not let your kids get home from school by themselves?
“Parents are in the grip of anxiety and when you’re anxious, you’re totally warped,” the author of “A Nation of Wimps,” Hara Estroff Marano, said. We become so bent out of shape over something as simple as letting your children out of sight on the playground that it starts seeming on par with letting them play on the railroad tracks at night. In the rain. In dark non-reflective coats.
The problem with this everything-is-dangerous outlook is that over-protectiveness is a danger in and of itself. A child who thinks he can’t do anything on his own eventually can’t.
Meantime, my son wants his next trip to be from Queens. In my day, I doubt that would have struck anyone as particularly brave. Now it seems like hitchhiking through Yemen.
Here’s your MetroCard, kid. Go.
Stupid.
Unlike India, children are valued here. They only have one life, taking chances with thet one life is stupid. They grow up fast enought.
I agreed (first time for everything) with your one-word assessment, however, the mother in question was American, not Indian.
|