How is this even controversial???

It's controversial because she's advocating leaving your kids alone in NYC park for a day. I know Amy adores her, but I just think this is nuts.

In my first week living in NYC as a freshman in college, a girl a block away was murdered and a bus I was on was highjacked by thugs.

I was 19, and tried to never to be alone in that city. Dropping an 8 yr old child off in a city park without a parent supervising seems insane to me. I agree with her basic philosophy about playing outdoors more, but why does she have to support such risky stunts? The fact that nothing bad happened that particular day doesn't make it a smart move for parents.

Activities for children have become so organized and usually is arranged by what the parents enjoy and who the parents are friends with. I let my daughter go to the park and play with her friends, but some of her friends are not allowed to walk there or hang out there. I guess the parent would rather the kid sit home on Facebook or Formspring.
My only disappointment in what Lenore is doing is the fact that if the news article is correct, she lives in Queens and the park she's choosing to send her kids to is in Manhattan. If she's truly about a neighborhood getting to know one another than she should stick to the neighborhood where her children live.

Lovelysoul, I live on Long Island, about 45 minuted drive from Manhattan. I have never been afraid there for me or for my kids. I have gone in often with them and allowed them to walk around while I went to another store and we'd meet back up. People get mugged and murdered everywhere. If you teach them how to behave and to use common sense, they're fine. Some people seem to ignore the fact that NY is not one of the most dangerous cities in the country and I'm not sure why.

Why not have a "Leave our doors unlocked" day, or a "leave your jewelry in the park day?" The fact that most of the time a criminal doesn't rob you doesn't make it any less stupid. We know there are bad people out there who only need to be matched with an opportunity.

Besides, what if your child is simply acting out and being rude in the park that afternoon? What gives the parent the right just to leave their child unsupervised so he/she can bother others?

Pre-teens and teens are different. I let my daughter go to the park alone, but she didn't at 8 or 9. And I sure wouldn't have dropped her off at that age in a NYC park and gone shopping.

I have tenants who let their young kids roam freely around my place unsupervised. Some go near the water, run around the docks, and they can't even swim. It's a huge concern for me as a business owner because if they drown or get hurt, guess who'll be at fault?

What bothers me is that there are plenty of lax parents out there who view this as a justification for not properly supervising their kids.

I will tell you of three incidents in my area that have occurred this past year to change my thinking with regard to this topic. Often times, when this issue is discussed on this board, people say, "Well, you never really hear about kids being stolen on the news" or "If there was a child stolen, we would all know about it". Well, no you wouldn't. The fact is the media doesn't always highlight these stories and I have three examples to prove that this is true.

First, I have told you about the 4th grade girl that was almost taken from my neighborhood in October. Trust me, we are not big city and lots of people here leave their doors unlocked. This story never even made it into the news. This was the real deal too... he had a hold of her and was dragging her to his car. When we complained about the lack of coverage, our local police officer told us this happens a lot more often than you think and the media isn't really interested.

Second, about three weeks ago I got an e-mail from our Girl Scout troop leader. A 16 year old GS has been missing from her home for a month now. They were wanting the parents of local GS troops to go out and beat the bushes looking for evidence or, heaven forbid, her body. The police have classified her as missing or abducted. The last time she was seen? Coming out of rave or drug den... nope... getting off the bus after school. This has not been on the news. Not her being missing or the local search for her.

Finally, last Sunday at 10:30 a.m. The man living 8 houses down the street from me, chased his wife out onto the driveway and shot her 9 times in front of the neighbors. She was 6 1/2 months pregnant. He did this in front of his three other children ages 2, 4, 8. I do not live in the city. I live in a really nice upper middle-class neighborhood. You would think this kind of violence would have been the top story but it wasn't. It wasn't even mentioned in the teasers for the newscast. The sick creep even smiled for the cameras and said, "She had it coming." and that didn't make it unusual for them. (I didn't know her, but others did and trust me, she didn't have it coming.) There were people living here who didn't even know it happened.

The moral of story... media coverage of these types of events is never what you think it will be. Things could be going on around you that would shock the crap out of you if only you knew. I for one, will be keeping a closer eye on my child.

Sheepmommy, yes, it happens, but it is SO RARE that the consequences of NOT letting your children roam are more likely to be dire than the consequences of letting them roam.

"People travel with ease around the boroughs on the subway, first of all, and I'm guessing she made this be in Central Park because it's easier to get news crews to go five blocks than five miles."

Yes, people do travel with ease through the boroughs. I get that, but the point of her day is more localized so I'm hoping that its for the ease of the news crews. Overall, she is correct though. The decline of the neighborhoods has impacted kids playing.
There have been some recent incidents in my area of strange men in vans. I don't think that its never going to happen and we are more aware. I have taught my daughter to walk in groups when possible and if not possible to use good judment which means during the day in populated areas and if someone calls her over to their car, she is to walk the other way. Yes, people ask directions, but not of a 12 year old girl. And if its a decent person, they'd understand a young girl stepping away.

NicoleK you are certainly entitled to your opinion, but my point is that it is not as rare you think it is. I am also not sure what the dire consquences are of looking after my child. I let her play in the park. She plays every day. I don't follow her around from tree to tree, but I am on a bench where I can see (not hear) her and her friends. How exactly is this detrimental to her? Keep in mind, there has been at least one child predator in my neighborhood targeting 4th grade girls (my dd is in 4th grade). Do you still think I am unreasonable?

What gives the parent the right just to leave their child unsupervised so he/she can bother others?

That's funny.

I've seen parents 5 feet away from their misbehaving spawn not do a damn thing to correct their offspring. Even if their spawn is making life miserable for the rest of the patrons of a restaurant.

Lenore Skenazy is probably letting her kid ride the subway alone into Manhattan from Queens to get to the park. First time commenting here. As someone who was molested as a child in the kids section of the library in Rochester, NY in 1976 (especially loved that item from a few weeks ago), I really struggle as to what is free-range and what is insane. Yes, I want my daughter to be independent, but I also want her to be safe. I certainly think it's reasonable to keep an eye on my four-year old in the park. Will probably still be there when she is in the 4th grade. And c'mon, I lived in NYC for 19 years. Yes, it's gotten a lot safer and instances of child abduction are indeed rare, but men exposing themselves, crazy homeless and executives shouting obscenities, and so on, aren't. Certainly not something I want my daughter dealing with on her own.

The dire consequences of hovering over your child and not letting your child out to play are that they don't get enough exercise, that they don't learn to be independent, and that the first time they ARE on their own they are unable to handle it, and that they don't learn to navigate the world. The other consequences are loneliness and isolation.

I mean, are you seriously advocating that 16-year-olds need to be picked up at the bus stop? That does seem to be the implication, given that you point out that a 16-year-old vanished. Any parent who insists on picking up their 16-year-old at the bus stop is NOT doing their child any favors.

Anyone who hovers over their kid and doesn't teach them to figure out how to get by is a terrible parent.

The statistics on abductions can all be found in Ms. Lenore's book.

It's not just the crazies or the pedophiles, it's that kids get hurt playing. My son slipped and knocked himself out, bleeding profusely, while I was only a few yards away. Thankfully, I was there to rush him to the emergency room, but would a stranger? Especially now when men are afraid to even approach a child for fear of being branded a pedophile?

I just don't see the point in rushing most of this. I mean, we all know kids need to learn to be independent, take a subway, drive a car, but it's not going to harm them to learn later rather than sooner.

I mean, you don't give your car keys to a 10 yr old. You wait until they have their learners permit at 15, then you drive with them for a year, while they gain maturity and experience, and at 16, you let them handle it independently. Are they worse off that they didn't learn to drive at 10? To me, if they started that young, there would simply be 5 more years of driving risk combined with less maturity.

What's her rush to have kids be totally unsupervised?

I was 19, and tried to never to be alone in that city.

I think that's nuts. I mean, in a bad neighborhood, sure, but anywhere in the city?

You know, it may just be that she feels she has to do something extreme enough to get attention, in order to get coverage for the issue.

An example in another context: My kids both travel to school by themselves, and have since they were in elementary school. This is not totally trivial - their schools are far enough away that they have to take commuter transportation. First, we went with them. Then it was loose supervision. Next came brief, well-practiced journeys like the trip to school. Now, a few years older, they travel many places by themselves.

Back to the park: Sure, it would be very irresponsible to drop off kids for the day, if they have never been alone. Who knows what idiocy they will get into? Once you know that you can trust your kids, there is no problem, as long as the park is in a reasonable neighborhood.

Regarding sheepmommy's comments: no, it is not more common that we think. Do you think parents let a child disappear and never report it? The crime statistics are entirely reliable in this regard, and the chances of a stranger abducting or abusing a child are almost zero. A kid is far more likely in mom's car on the way to the supermarket - and that is a risk parents take every day.

Step-by-step to independence. Anything else is a failure of parenting.

I'll be visiting the US with my kids this summer - be interesting to see if things have gotten as bad as they sound. I really, really hope not...

I've spent most of my 32 years in NYC, and I have never been assaulted or mugged, as a child or as an adult.

There's no reason people need to leave their kids alone in the park. A kid with a cell phone can call for help if another kid is hurt. A kid without a cell phone can ring a neighbor's bell and ask for help. Most people are decent and willing to help kids in trouble, no matter what Law and Order: SVU tells us. A few weeks ago, while I was taking my father to a doctor's appointment, a preteen girl fell and twisted her ankle. She banged up her knees pretty badly. I and three other people stopped to help, and we didn't leave until we were sure her father was on his way to pick her up.

it is not as rare you think it is.

The statistics tell us it IS as rare as we think it is. A child has a better chance of being struck my lightning than being taken by a kidnapper. A child has a far, far better chance of being killed in a car accident being driven to school than being kidnapped walking to school.

I'm a fan of giving kids the level of independence they can handle. And most kids are more capable than we think -- if we let them be.

Exactly. I'm all for step-by-step independence, but that isn't what seemed to be advocated by "Leave your kid at the park day." If she'd meant 12 yr olds rather than 8 and 9 yr olds I'd feel differently.

Abductions are rare but there have been numerous stories shared on this board of molestations. Recently, the swim coach who stuck his finger up a little girl's (was it Kristen?) vagina while "tossing" her. That was in plain view of other adults. So, we know there are creeps out there looking for an opportunity to touch children inappropriately. Sometimes, the children don't tell.

Little Summer Thompson of FL had 152 registered sex offenders within a 5 mile radius of her home, as she walked from school that day, running ahead of her brother and sister. Sure, many of those were probably on the sex offender registry for lesser offenses, but one of them got her.

There's no reason to start this so early. Even if the odds are low, why take the chance when it's unnecessary? Do you really think it means your child will never grow up and develop independence if he/she doesn't ride the subway alone at 9? What's so horrible about waiting until 12?

I didn't ride the subway until 19, and I mastered it fine and live an independent life. I don't think I suffered immensely from not having that experience earlier. Nor do I think I'm nuts to have always tried to have a companion with me, especially at night. As an attractive, petite blond girl alone in the city, I knew I was a target, so I didn't take needless chances. And, anyway, it was more fun to see the city with a friend. Just as I think an 8 yr old can have plenty of fun in the park with mom or dad nearby.

That's your job as parents, folks. Don't dump your kid off at the park and take off shopping and pat yourself on the back because you're "teaching independence". Sure, I'll help if your kid sprains her ankle, or gets into a scuffle with another kid...or, God forbid, lets out a scream from the bushes when someone tries to grab her...but it's not my responsibility. It's yours.

If she'd meant 12 yr olds rather than 8 and 9 yr olds I'd feel differently.

Some 9-year-olds are more capable than some 12-year-olds. My father worked his first job at 6 years old. When I was 9, I was watching other foster kids for an hour when my mother ran out to the store. She'd be arrested today, no doubt, but nothing bad every happened to those kids. Capability comes partly from fostering independence early and partly from a child's inherent capabilities, but age is only one way to measure it.

Recently, the swim coach who stuck his finger up a little girl's (was it Kristen?) vagina while "tossing" her. That was in plain view of other adults.

Exactly. So having a parent hovering would not help anyway in a situation like this.

As an attractive, petite blond girl alone in the city, I knew I was a target, so I didn't take needless chances.

As an attractive, petite blonde girl alone in the city, I never felt like a target, and nothing scarring has ever happened to me as a result of strangers. I didn't go out in rough neighborhoods after dark and stayed aware of my surroundings. The few times I found myself in a difficult situation, I trusted my instincts as to which adults to ask for help. Once, when I was lost in a rough neighborhood as it was getting dark, a guy working in a car dealership suggested I wait inside for a family member to pick me up. It taught me that most people are not out to jump my delicate bones.

Bad shit can happen. Bad shit can happen even when parents are standing right there. Bad shit is more likely to happen when people don't know how to respond appropriately.

I'm not suggesting parents drop their toddlers in a park overnight. I just think parents should think less in terms of protecting their kids from all possible harm and more in terms of teaching their kids how to protect themselves from harm. If you live in a good neighborhood and have a kid with an average amount of common sense, there, is probably no harm in leaving him/her in a park 10 blocks away for a couple of hours. If a kid isn't capable of being unsupervised for a couple of hours, then it's a parent's job to teach that kids how to get there.

The point was that if the swim coach would be so bold as to cop a feel like that with parents around what would he do if parents weren't watching? Pedophiles look for the most vulnerable victims. Younger kids without parents around make the easiest prey.

And we're a selectively bad sample because we're here. If we'd been abducted and killed, we wouldn't be on this blog. The guy suggested you wait inside for a reason. It's not safe.

I guess it all gets down to what risks are worth it to you. I mean, as you say, you avoided certain areas after dark and stayed alert. That indicates that, at some level, you know there's a risk, yet it was worth it to you to get wherever you were going. We all make these choices in life.

But young kids don't need to take the subway to work on Wallstreet. They don't have a valid reason to be in a park alone, without their parents, at age 8. Proving a point is not a good enough reason to take the risk, in my opinion. And, like I said, it's not just about abductions, but injuries and incidents between kids that happen when children aren't supervised, not to mention the burden you're placing on other parents to deal with those potential issues.

We used to live in neighborhoods where moms were home, watching the kids out the window while making dinner, but now, so many people are working that you can't count on that. We also don't have extended relatives nearby. We live in communities of strangers.

My son broke his ankle when he was 13 playing at the park down the street from our house, and a neighbor father brought him home (luckily, he didn't consider appearing like a pedophile). It was no easy task either, as my son was wrenching and crying in pain. I hated that he had to deal with that imposition, but if you live in a small, family-oriented neighborhood, people readily pitch in to help. Others know your kid and where you live. But, also, my son was 13, not 8, and we're not talking about having NO parents around, as Skenazy is suggesting. That's asking for trouble. Kids left with absolutely no adult supervision are not only at risk themselves but they tend to get into all kinds of mischief.

''So if I'm at the park and your kid falls down and hurts his arm, I'm supposed to help him?' '

That made me stop, and I read it again. Eh!? I hope she's not typical.

From the article

"It could be for just 10 minutes or for half an hour - whatever you and your children are ready for. By leaving them to play with each other, they’ll have to figure out for themselves what to do with a ball or a piece of chalk."

"I’m suggesting people go to their neighbourhood parks at 10am on Saturday – if we all go around the same time, then we and our kids have more of a chance of running into each other and getting to know each other. The whole point is to meet your neighbours, for your kids to make friends and then maybe they’ll say the next day: ‘Mum, it’s beautiful outside! I’m going to go down the street to Jennifer’s house."

She's not proposing "Stick your kid on a train and Hope for the best day" or "Abandon your kid to his/her fate day." I imagine some parent's wouldn't even go further away than where they could see the kid from behind a tree or something.

I have nothing against neighborhood playdates. Great idea, as long as parents stick around (I wondered, too, how many actually left or hid behind trees with binoculars). But, seriously, are there really kids who don't know what to do with a ball or piece of chalk? I think she's exaggerating how dependent kids are. Most kids know how to play with others, and they can do so for hours, while mom or dad sits on a park bench and keeps an eye on them. They don't have to disappear for the kids to play independently.

All parents should learn the art of blending into the background. I find out so much important teenage stuff just casually walking in and out, doing my chores, with my ears perked up, while my kids and their friends hang out. You don't have to get involved, but you need to stay alert.

Kids left with absolutely no adult supervision are not only at risk themselves but they tend to get into all kinds of mischief.

Part of being in a community is that other people look out for everyone else. So another adult was "supervising" your kids. Don't you ever go to the park and if another "unsupervised" kid were to break something -- would you not help them?

That is the thought being lost in this conversation: It does take a village, but not in the sense of government overreach. It is in the sense of you and your neighbors look out for each other.

The only problem I had with the whole article was the idea of not going outside if you didn't see any other kids when you looked out the window.

If I wasn't at the home of my best friend, or at the park riding my bike down the hills, I was perfectly happy to play outside by myself, climb the maple tree in our backyard and use my imagination. Never fell out, either (even though no one was there to warn me to be careful).

I don't know what it would be like to grow up in a big city, but I think I would have been like a poor version of Eloise.

Well, like I said, my first week in NY, a girl a block from me was murdered in her bathtub, and then a bus I was riding on to go to a museum was hijacked. They kicked the driver off the bus (he ran behind it), while they robbed almost everyone. If I hadn't been sitting between two big guys in the back, I would've had my purse taken. They demanded purses, wallets, and jewelry, then casually got off the bus and the driver got back on.

This was in Brooklyn, so perhaps I would've felt safer in Manhatten, or maybe it just gave me a better understanding of the dangers than those of you who had nothing happen.

I mean, nothing happens most of the time. You're not LIKELY to be a statistic. Neither are your kids, but I think you lessen the odds even more to take precautions, especially if they're really not that difficult, such as staying in the park, rather than leaving.

And yes, it takes a village. I would certainly help someone's child, like my neighbor helped mine. I would and I have. But I've also resented having to play babysitter to kids that were too young to be left unsupervised. There's a big difference between an 8 yr old and 13 yr old. I'm sure their parents think they're so brilliant and mature that they'll be fine, but parents often overestimate their child's maturity level.

When my son broke his leg at 13, nobody thought I should've been there supervising him at the park because he was obviously old enough to be there unattended, but it would be a different perception if he had only been 8. I'm sure my neighbors would be whispering, "Where was she?" And they'd be right.

Today's Dear Abby (second letter) is somewhat relevant. Obviously, there's still a lot of parents out there who aren't that overprotective.

http://www.uexpress.com/dearabby/

Isn't that the city where so many of the posters here have seen people injured and ignored-including a seizing baby?? I can't imagine I'd let my kid ride the subway or go to the park alone there. Miss lenore seems a little like the parents who refused to tell people their kids gender-she's performing some sort of experiment with her kids to prove a point to society. And my just-turned 6 year olds walked to school by themselves today, not for the first time, so I'm not paranoid.

Isn't that the city where so many of the posters here have seen people injured and ignored-including a seizing baby??

In a city the size of New York, you're going to see the range of human behavior, from grotesque to extraordinary. We tend to remember the stuff that hits hard. When I've needed a hand with something, I've found New Yorkers to be more helpful than the people in the small towns I've lived in. In the small towns, if they didn't know you, they didn't help you.

And my just-turned 6 year olds walked to school by themselves today, not for the first time, so I'm not paranoid.

Sounds like you're already acting in the spirit of what she intends.

Yeah, no thanks. I live in a decent suburb in Minnesota and even I'm not letting my 7 year old go to park alone! I agree that sound INSANE!

God, this thread makes me happy I don't have kids. The freedom that we all had as children ("come home when the street lights turn on") is completely gone. And it's not like you can raise your children free-range on your own. Listen to the mothers on this thread: they will enforce the new, insanely cautious rules. No parent wants to risk a visit from CPS just to let their kid walk to school on their own. Insanity.

My MIL walked 2 miles to school by herself in mid-town Manhattan in the 40's. I biked to school by myself at age 7 in mid-size CA town in the 70s. Now parents drive their teenagers to the bus stop located 2 blocks away and wait with them for the bus to come. And guess what? There are consequences. When those kids show up at my university, they are often unprepared for interactions in the adult world. (Parents calling to complain about their college kids' grades--whew!)

Amy, I am so glad you posted this.

I am torn myself. I agree that kids today are waaaaay to overprotected and dependant. They need to learn how to play with others, problem solve, and just get dirty. Nowadays though people are so afraid of wittle pwecious getting hurt that they keep them in plastic bubbles.

I also agree that we would be remiss to ignore the fact that society today is also much more self involved then they used to be and are not as likely as they were 20 years ago to jump in and help in a dangerous situation. Not because people don't care, but because people are way to distracted with our Ipods, blackberries, and lap tops now to even notice anything going on around us within a ten feet perimeter half the time, much less take notice of some random kid across the way.

I think that independant play is a great idea if it is exocuted properly. A parent shouldn't use this as an excues to dump thier kid and expect others to "take care of them", but I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that others woudl help if they could. Parents (well the good ones anyway) know their kid best and what they can handle. I know that at 8, I was mature enough to play outside alone but my little sister wasn't. I also think there is safety in numbers. I think that as long as the parents have taught their children how to react in a dangerous situatuation, and the kids all stay together, I don't see a problem with them being alone at the park.

I also think it would be a good idea to implant a GPS locator in my kids neck, but I think there are laws against that... :p

I think society has changed in that parents are more aware of issues like molestation that was never talked about before. If it happened in your family, you didn't tell the neighbors or the community. Often, the family members and victims were in complete denial.

One of my grandmother's cousins was cast out of the family after being impregnated by her father (at 12 or 14). In shame, they sent her out into the woods (she somehow survived and went on to have a decent life). This was just a family secret. He was never prosecuted or put on the sex offender registry, which, of course, didn't exist. Families and victims covered this stuff up back then.

So, we lived in kind of a bubble BEFORE. A false sense of Mayberry-type security. Once counseling became more en vogue, which was probably the 70s, these issues started being revealed. Victims were more open about what had happened to them, and we became aware that there were pedophiles lurking about, even next door.

It's not that this stuff didn't happen before. Our parents just didn't know about it, so they felt much more comfortable letting us roam around and trusting the pleasant-seeming neighbors to watch us.

How many of us were molested though? I know several people my age who were, so it's not that uncommon.

My point is that this freedom and lack of supervision had a price for some kids. It still does, except now we can't plead ignorance as parents, like generations before us.

I know several people my age who were, so it's not that uncommon.

I know three people who were molested -- all by family members, and, in one case, by a neighbor in her own living room. If we want to keep kids safe, we need to keep them away from their families.

I think our fear is actually making kids less safe. The neighbors on my block would help us out because they knew who we were. I know one child in my whole neighborhood now, and that's only because she lives right across the hall. If I saw a child kicking and screaming and being hauled off by an adult, I would assume it was a parent, quite possibly ignoring a kidnapping in progress. We're afraid of strangers because we won't let them be anything but strangers.

I think recent stats show that molestations are actually decreasing, and experts believe it's because of all the awareness.

The problem for parents is that we're no longer naive about these dangers. My ex MIL had 7 kids, and at least 2 have memories of being molested or near molested as children. But she's 90, and comes from that more innocent time, so when confronted with this, she's able to legitimately say, "Well, I had no idea!" In other words, she has plausible deniability, so her kids give her a pass for not protecting them better.

Modern parents, however, understand that we won't get a pass. We know the kind-looking neighbor could actually be a child predator. It's a shame, but we do. And that has increased our need to be more vigilant.

We don't have to keep kids from knowing their neighbors, but allowing them to wander from yard to yard, unsupervised, like every house contains Aunt Bee and Opie, is simply no longer an option.

"So, we lived in kind of a bubble BEFORE. A false sense of Mayberry-type security."

This is true. People didn't talk about it as much back then. I know that even 20 years ago, when it happened to me, it was considered shameful and no one would talk about it. There used to be this stigma attached to the victims that there isn't anymore. However, that doesn't mean it happens more now than it did then. People just talk about it more now than they did then. The news features stories like this daily thus keeping us in a constant state of paranoia.

Also, like one poster pointed out, stranger kidnappings, and assaults are rare. Most kids are usually harmed by members of their own families and/or family friends. Leaving a child to play in the playground is more likely to result in a broken bone than a kidnapping/assault.

It's also important to remember that we didn't have neighbors on drugs back then. Maybe you had a few drunks in the neighborhood, but nobody was on coke or crystal meth or oxycodone. Nobody was running a meth lab in their home. There weren't drug dealers in the park.

Even if your neighbor is a great person sober, you don't know what he/she may be like high. And a lot of ordinary looking people have serious substance issues today.

Molestations are down, which is great, but so is violent crime across the board, so there's only so much we can attribute to awareness of it.

Certainly, keeping kids under constant supervision will prevent some bad things from happening to them. But it will also prevent many truly wonderful moments of exploration and discovery from happening to them, which seems like a terrible price to pay.

There are ways for kids to be safe without adults supervising. Kids playing together in groups at the park are not targets, even for adult predators. I don't remember ever reading a news article about someone kidnapping and/or molesting an entire group of kids playing at the park.

I was just reading this story about an 8-year-old boy who saved his sister from a kidnapper at the beach. Some people might walk away from this saying, "See, predators are everywhere!" And certainly, no one is suggesting leaving a 4-year-old by herself at the beach. But this little boy, at 8 years old, had the presence of mind and courage to fight off a middle-aged man. Kids are capable of sorting out the problems that are far more likely to happen at the park, such as falling down and getting a cut or getting stung by a bee.

It's also important to remember that we didn't have neighbors on drugs back then.

Of course we had neighbors on drugs back then. At least, we did when I was a kid. Drugs aren't new. For as long as there have been mind-altering drugs, there have been people abusing them. Drunks can be just as dangerous as drug addicts. If a person's neighborhood is riddled with basement meth labs and crackheads in every window, then it says more about the particular neighborhood and less about "people today." In that case, then it probably IS best that kids not go to the park without an adult -- or with an adult.

Well, I'm in my 40s. Yes, we had drugs in the 60/70s - young people did - but they certainly weren't as prevalent or mainstream as they are now. A high percentage of abuse and neglect cases I've handled as a guardian-ad-litem involve at least one parent with a substance abuse problem. Increasingly, it's meth or prescription drugs. And this is in ordinary, suburban, small towns. It's a big problem throughout the country.

I don't know what our kids miss out on, really. I think it's overblown. My kids sail, fish, my son flies airplanes, my daughter learned to dance and sing and play guitar at an early age. Our kids don't miss out on much.

We're the ones who are so nostalgic for the wanderings of our youth. That's about all we did. It was fun, but comparatively, our kids have a lot more fun, and they're gaining skills and hobbies that will serve them well in the future.

It's not like kids will never go to the park alone. They do, when they're a bit older. And they confront dangers there. My daughter is 16, and she's seen other kids almost OD at the park. One girl got alcohol poisoning and had to be rushed to the hospital for a stomach pump, which is lovely.

These are the kinds of things that happen at parks today - just among teens hanging out - and there's plenty of time for them to deal with that. We don't need to rush a younger child into it just to prove to ourselves that the world isn't different from when we were growing up. It is different.

A high percentage of abuse and neglect cases I've handled as a guardian-ad-litem involve at least one parent with a substance abuse problem.

I'm glad you mentioned this, because I find your approach to this similar to other people who work in similar fields -- meaning, being exposed to so much negativity can skew a person's perspective on how prevalent this stuff really is. A friend of mine was a crime reporter and refuses to post pictures of his kids on Facebook because of fear of predators. The only violent drug addicts I feared growing up were the ones who lived in my house. They were not a danger to strangers' kids, though.

So far, nothing you've said has convinced me that kids need to fear strangers at the park. They may very well need to fear themselves and each other, though. There are no strange men at the park forcing teenagers to OD. Even the drug addicts in my neighborhood were more interested in stealing radios than messing with little kids. I bet your daughter got a valuable education about not drinking so much you almost die.

It is different.

It IS different. Kids are safer now than they have ever been. It's too bad people are so much more afraid of the world. They move to safe neighborhoods specifically so their children can grow up safely, then teach them that the world is out to get them.

I mourn the freedom children have lost not out of a sense of nostalgia but out of serious concern for how stunted so many kids seem.

Yes, but are kids safer because parents are more vigilant or because the world is a safer place? I'd bet the former.

Maybe my experiences have skewed my perspective because, as a guardian, I go into my neighbor's homes and learn all their dirty little secrets, from molestation and abuse to drug use. This is not in a separate part of town or limited to just certain "kinds" of families. These are literally my neighbors, who appear like ordinary people.

Yes, but are kids safer because parents are more vigilant or because the world is a safer place? I'd bet the former.

It's the latter. Violent crime is down overall, not just crimes against children.

It speaks volumes that despite the horror shows you witness daily, these people are not out hurting strangers' children. They are a far greater threat to their own families.

Monica, I just don't deal with the ones that hurt other people's children, as there's no question of them having parental rights. I do encounter children that have been molested by people other than their parents, and usually it's because the parent is asleep at the switch (usually due to drugs or alcohol) and neglected to watch after their child.

I don't understand how you are comforted by the fact the molestation is mostly limited to their own children or stepchildren. To me, this just says these are the kids this predator has easy access to. Give him easy access to your children, and he will molest them too.

I think the reason molestations have decreased is because the access to children has decreased. If we start having "Leave your Kid at the Park Day" regularly, it would be a child predator's dream.

MonicaP:

The statistics tell us it IS as rare as we think it is. A child has a better chance of being struck my lightning than being taken by a kidnapper. A child has a far, far better chance of being killed in a car accident being driven to school than being kidnapped walking to school.

True enough, but the psychological part is different. Parents might be able to accept the death of a child from a bolt of lightening a bit easier then a kidnapper who rapes, tortures and murders their child. Big difference and any sane parents would do whatever it took to prevent that nightmare scenario 100%.

LS - hear hear!

LS,let me tell you about my son. He's 7 years old. Today after school, one of his friends came for him, and he's been out without me ever since. He just called me, totally on his own, to tell me that the two of them are at another freind's house and might ride bikes around the block. I told him to make sure to stick with his freinds and also spoke to the friend's mom to tell her to get me if needed. I am very proud of how responsible he is at only age 7. He would never have the chance if I worried my brains out over all of the possible things that could ever happen to him. I'm glad that my kids have a normal childhood, one like I remember. I'm very happy that I live in an area where this is not uncommon. I'm not negligent, I'm always on top of things, and my son knows that if he ever breaks my trust he will not have this freedom.

KarenW, I'm not against that! My kids did the same. As long as you trust the other parent to watch out for them, I see no problem with the boys riding bikes around the block. He isn't alone, but with a friend, and he isn't entirely unsupervised because the other mom is paying attention.

I think age 7 is a little too young to just ride around without some limitations - in area (around the block or house to house) and time (the time it would reasonably take them to go around the block or house to house). Parents have to allow young kids some freedom, while also being cautious enough to notice if they don't return in a reasonable amount of time. That is what I mean by supervision, not a parent attaching themselves at the hip.

Parents might be able to accept the death of a child from a bolt of lightening a bit easier then a kidnapper who rapes, tortures and murders their child.

As long as we are acknowledging that this hyper-awareness of "safety" isn't about keeping kids safe at all: It's about parents maintaining the illusion of control. Whether struck by lightning or murdered by a stranger, either way, the kid is dead in a pretty horrible way, and the lightning strike is far more likely. Parents are buying this illusion of control at the price of teaching kids that there's a bad man behind every tree waiting to diddle them.

MonicaP, that's a bit extreme. It's not being "hyper-aware" of safety. It's just being aware.

There are many things that we do now in the name of safety that our parents or grandparents didn't do, such as buckling a child into a car seat or seatbelt. For decades after cars were invented, this safety threat wasn't considered. Then, as we got more data about how children might be injured or killed in car accidents, we all learned to buckle them in for safety.

Is that being "hyper-aware"? No, just aware. Are you really calculating the odds of your child being injured every time you buckle him in, and thinking "oh, it's unlikely, he would be a statistics"? No. Why would we measure safety like that? It's SAFER - this is what we know. And now that we know it, unlike parents before us, we must act accordingly.

And, unlike parents before us, we have the weight of culpability because we DO know it.

Explain to your child someday why he is paralyzed because you didn't buckle him in. By the same tenant, explain to your daughter why she was molested by a pervert because you couldn't be bothered to watch her closely enough, and you wanted her to have the "kind of childhood you had".

Minus the last part, that is the conversation I hear from parents who have failed to protect their children. It's not pretty, so there's absolutely nothing wrong with a parent considering how they would feel AFTER something bad happens that is under their control. Much of what can harm our children ISN'T in our control, but these things are, and that's why safer is better.

The car example is important, because this is exactly where parents SHOULD be focusing most of their attention. 250,000 kids are hurt in car accidents every year. It is proven that seat belts save lives. 115 kids are abducted by strangers every year, and this number does not differentiate home-invasion abductions, such as that little girl who was kidnapped from her own bedroom, from the other kinds. Parents are putting their energy in all the wrong places and using "for the sake of the children" as their excuse, when the reality is that it's for the sake of the parents.

Hyper-vigilance, in this case, likely hasn't saved a single child and has done much to make the world smaller and scarier for all children. A kid is far more likely to die in a car accident on the way to the park than she is to die walking to the park by herself.

At any rate, parents can do what they want with their kids within reason, but it's not neglectful to decide that your 8-year-old can play at the park by himself for a few hours.

You keep focusing on abductions, while ignoring the much more common molestation. Most child predators do not abduct or kill, but that doesn't mean that they aren't a threat!

There is good reason that parents need to watch their children, and it's not just to fear abductions or murders (although, what's wrong with that? Who wants their child to be that statistic either?).

You may not want to believe it, but you have child predators living near you. They appear just like ordinary people. They don't look like monsters. And, yes, more often than not, they will be molesting their children, grandchildren, or stepchildren. But that's only because they can't acquire easy access to other people's children since parents today are aware of this danger.

This HAS saved many children from harm. We can't measure what doesn't happen, but the fact that molestations have decreased supports this.

"It IS different. Kids are safer now than they have ever been."

Because, gee, maybe parents watch them better?

"Whether struck by lightning or murdered by a stranger, either way, the kid is dead in a pretty horrible way, and the lightning strike is far more likely"

So, since acts of God are out of our control, we shouldn't worry about anything? And really, what decent parent is going to take their kid out in lighting? Both scenarios are preventable to degrees.

important post, Although I wasnt fully engage on some issues initially, meeting enumeration till end, factual seems nice.