Schonrock kids and unchaperoned "school run"

[BB100]

Growlybear Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> > I can only

> follow my own standards and conscience...but we live in a very different world today,

>

If these statistics are to be believed we actually live in a safer world: traffic deaths are lower

than they ever have been (National Statistics, 15th April 2009) and child

murders at the hand of strangers remain consistently low (National Statistics,

11th June 2009).

So is it more dangerous, or has our perception of risk changed?

[dulwichmum]

No doubt the McCann's thought that they were safe to leave Madeleine and their twins alone in their apartment in Portugal when the family were on holiday.

If people use their common sense, they will seek to minimise risk for their children.

[BB100]

clare999 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Stats suggest thirteen under 15yo killed in

> Southwark on the roads last year - of which 80%

> cyclists or pedestrians. 2800 children killed or

> seriously injured on the roads in UK during the

> same year. Thats quite a lot.

And most I expect were with their parents!

[????]

BB100 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Growlybear Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > > I can only

> > follow my own standards and conscience...but we

> live in a very different world today,

> >

>

> If these statistics are to be believed we actually

> live in a safer world: traffic deaths are lower

> than they ever have been (National Statistics,

> 15th April 2009) and child

> murders at the hand of strangers remain

> consistently low (National Statistics,

> 11th June 2009).

>

> So is it more dangerous, or has our perception of

> risk changed?

I think traffic deaths have fallen mainly becuase of an improvement in car safety

[Dulwich Born And Bred]

Even if it was the 1950's, even if we lived in a nice little village, even if crime rates were extremely low, I would NOT let a 5 and 8 years old go to school alone. The emphasis is on their mental capacity. They cannot predict dangerous situations, they would not be able to react fast enough, any problems that could occur, an accident/strangers approaching them, high wind, icy pavements, a puncture on their wheel, they would not be mentally old enough to deal with it.

Being self confident and well rounded does not mean going to school alone, there are lots of ways of being confident and well rounded without putting them in a situation like that.

My mum grew up on a farm and used to cycle and walk miles everywhere, she got into some pickles when she was younger ( falling over, being bitten by a dog etc) and though she has very happy memories of all the freedom she had, she is the first person to say she would never do that to her own children/grandkids. This is not playing out in the front/back, where all the neighbours can watch the kids, this is travelling a mile to school. Dulwich is not crime free.

[chantelle]

I don't think the parents are negligent or irresponsible, they have made a considered decision and clearly analysed the potential risks.

I am shocked that Southwark won't let kids under 9 make their way home.

I am also surprised how rampant this feeling is that "things are different" now. What is so different from 20 or 30 years ago? I played unsupervised on my bike from 6, and walked to and from the school bus from 5, with an older brother (8). Children can deal with unexpected situations - in fact, it is the only way to learn to cope when things don't go according to plan.

The risks in this situation are minimal, IMO.

[James Barber]

Hi clare999,

Where did you get your stats from?

The last set of Southwark collision data I have to hand is for 2008, 8 kids seriously injured or killed. Nearly all of those seriously injured and the definition for this being very broad. Many of these were car occupants.

I think its really important that we avoid hysteria and judging on incomplete information.

I believe the kids concerned have been making this school run since the beginning of the school year in September 2009. The first rumblings I heard were around Christmas. Their school year ends this Thursday. For this to have blown up AFTER the school founders fete on Saturday with 4 school runs left before the end of the school year is excellent timing. Its not really a current issue - if this had been raised at Xmas or Easter it would be different with many more school journeys to be made. I suspect the parents with the glare of media interest will have made other arrangements for this week.

NB I wish I'd been a better parent so my kids cycling skills were sufficient that this could even be an option.

[buggie]

BB100 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> clare999 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Stats suggest thirteen under 15yo killed in

> > Southwark on the roads last year - of which 80%

> > cyclists or pedestrians. 2800 children killed

> or

> > seriously injured on the roads in UK during the

> > same year. Thats quite a lot.

>

> And most I expect were with their parents!

In my experience (as a paeds ED nurse) nearly all children who've been knocked over are accompanied by police or staff from the school while contact with the parents is attempted. About 8.45 is typical time for us to get a case like this and the typical history will be that they were crossing/running across the road right by their school.

Really wish there was a "like" option for post on here as there have been some very good points raised regarding age of responsibility.

Bit confused at the tone of several of the pro-parenting posts which seem to suggest anyone not supportive of the parents isn't wanting the children to cycle/walk to school at all. Very supportive them not being driven, but it is too much for the 8yr old to be expected to be responsible for the younger child as well.

[BB100]

I should explain that I've just spent the last 3 months on a research project at Uni analysing risk culture and people's perceptions of risk. It is well accepted in academic literature that there is an inbalance between perception of risk and actual risk, to the point of hysteria - which I think some of you have illustrated quite nicely. YES it is right and proper to protect children and use common sense in doing so but in our society we have gone too far. It is over-regulating, over-restricting and over-supervising children's lives. It is affecting the development and well-being of our children. Paranoid parenting is damaging our children with unknown consequences.

Please just keep in mind when you have this discussion and others like it - that as a society our perceptions of risk are distorted. I'm not saying the Schonrock's are right I'm just saying that we cannot see these types of issues as clearly as we think we do.

[Dulwich_ Park_ Fairy]

I'm a little suprised by the amount of people who feel that an 8yr old is perfectly capable of supervising a 5yr old, I might start pimping mine out for some babysitting/school pick-ups as presumably there'd be some takers on this forum. The bottom-line is that if anything does go wrong (and I'm thinking of broken arms rather than clown-style abductions) the parents are assuming that other adults will salvage the situation (unless, of course, the 8 yr old is a trained paramedic). I'm sure most adults would help but feel its a bit selfish to rely on this as a form of child-care. For the record, I was allowed to walk to school when I was 5 but it was in a rural area in the mid-70's, a trip of 400m, and didn't involve negotiating very busy city roads during rush-hour.

[BB100]

buggie Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> In my experience (as a paeds ED nurse) nearly all

> children who've been knocked over are accompanied

> by police or staff from the school while contact

> with the parents is attempted. About 8.45 is

> typical time for us to get a case like this and

>

One of the things I found from my research was that children are now less competent than we used to be because of the over-parenting. They are losing the self-care skills we used to have, becuase we are not letting them take the risks we used to take as children. So of course they will get run-over going to school because they don't learn to cross the road at other times.

[BB100]

Dulwich_ Park_ Fairy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The bottom-line is that if anything does go wrong

> the parents are assuming

> that other adults will salvage the situation

> (unless, of course, the 8 yr old is a trained

> paramedic). I'm sure most adults would help but

> feel its a bit selfish to rely on this as a form

> of child-care.

So are adults being selfish when they leave the house in the morning hoping someone will come to their aid if they get run-over? Do you leave home with a trained paramedic?

[citizenED]

But what kind of society do you want? If we keep going in this direction of over-supervising our children and other people's children we will end up with a horribly paranoid society. Do you want children to be in a stifling situation at all times, supervised and overseen by a responsible adult? The journey to school is a good place to start for extending freedom and liberty. It isn't directed time in class or at home, and it isn't free time. It hits that area of a semi-controlled environment, ie, known route, known destination, largely known hazards. No doubt thew children are known on the route by other parents and passers-by. How great it would be if we, as a community, support such a decision.

[Dulwich_ Park_ Fairy]

So are adults being selfish when they leave the house in the morning hoping someone will come to their aid if they get run-over? Do you leave home with a trained paramedic?

Now we're just descending into the ridiculous. Raise your game.

[Dulwich Born And Bred]

I think that is absolutely rubbish as my mum took myself and my other siblings to school and back, and we can all cross the road perfectly safely! We have never been in an accident. We were always taught when we went to school with mum to stop Stop, Look and Listen. Mum would always ask us when was it safe to cross the road and if it was correct she would say so and if it was not correct she would tell us why and pull us back.

I do the same when I am out with my charges, nieces, nephew etc, I always always when we come to a road explain why we have stopped, about using a safe crossing etc whilst asking them questions and they are really good and know to automatically stop etc so I know in time they will be absolutely fine at crossing the roads by themselves.

For goodness sake, Kids are not kids for very long and it is a bit much asking a 5 and 8 years old to be extra careful travelling by themselves.

[James Barber]

At that age I supervised my younger sister going on errands to shops etc.

Road collisions were absolutely higher but traffic was less. So it felt and looked safer but in fact was more dangerous than now.

We were once accosted by a couple in town and it took ages to escape them and their calling to god. But we did.

My kids aren't yet ready for this but if this family feel ready and looking at Telegraph route they take it looks sensible with lots of people about then I'm glad it has been working for them.

[clare999]

Most of the children killed or seriously injured were older, and not supervised by an adult.

[Dulwich Born And Bred]

I don't think Stats is a good way of protecting yourself. Stats are just numbers, it does not exempt anyone from having the same thing happening to them.

And I still maintain that if the parents really believe in entrusting their kids ability to go to school unsupervised, why do they not let them return home unsupervised?

[dulwichmum]

James Barber Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> At that age I supervised my younger sister going

> on errands to shops etc.

> Road collisions were absolutely higher but traffic

> was less. So it felt and looked safer but in fact

> was more dangerous than now.

> We were once accosted by a couple in town and it

> took ages to escape them and their calling to god.

> But we did.

>

> My kids aren't yet ready for this but if this

> family feel ready and looking at Telegraph route

> they take it looks sensible with lots of people

> about then I'm glad it has been working for them.

And if it had not "been working for them" James, where would the blame lie exactly?

With the 8 year old, who due to poor judgement crossed a road at the wrong time?

With the school head master or neighbours or other parents who did not question the parents judgement?

With the parents who allowed these young children to cycle through a very busy area every morning unsupervised?

With a local councillor who is trying to raise his profile on an online forum, but is simply succeeding in hi-lighting his poor judgement?

[BB100]

clare999 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Most of the children killed or seriously injured

> were older, and not supervised by an adult.

You still don't say where you get your stats from or date.

[Growlybear]

Apart from previous concerns I've already expressed about this issue, I'm struggling to think of a good reason why it is important to make a five year old independent and able to make their own way to school or why this could possibly be necessary. I live a similar distance from the primary school my daughter attended, and would never have let her travel to school on her own. As a parent, I saw it as one of my fundamental resposniblities to make sure that my child arrived at school safely and on time. In all seven years at primary school, my daughter was never late on a single occasion. I don't see that as anything special, just basic parenting responsiblity. My daughter did not have a problem adjusting to making a 10 mile journey to secondary school, and having been under my supervision on her way to primary school, had developed a really through understanding of road safety, and general awareness of her surroundings.

[citizenED]

I think many people who are supportive of these parent's decision are so but with a couple of misgivings - personally I wish the kids were both a couple of years older and that the journey was a little shorter so that they could walk it. Having said that I think that the whole idea of kids walking to school unsupervised feels right and, in principle, I happily support it.

[James Barber]

Hi Dulwichmum,

I'm sorry my different views have incited a personal jibe.

If the lollipop person said to cross at the wrong time then clearly the lollipop person would be at fault.

If a car jumped red traffic lights when these kids are crossing on a green man phase then the car driver would be at fault.

I'm sorry you think I'm trying to raise my profile. Unlike virtually every other person posting I do it in my own name.

It's a really important issue in terms of encouraging people to walk and cycle to schools. Most of the anti people posting have suggested the roads are so dangerous kids should'nt be out alone. I suspect most of these drive their kids to school. Which is exactly what causes this perceived danger.

My kids aren't yet ready to undertake school runs on their own - as much due to me as a parent not preparing them. But they have been asking and we've been creating smaller opportunities for them to stretch their confidence.

I hope that all parents hearing of this case wont hold their kids even closer but reflect on how we can ensure we're not micromanaging every waking moment but find ways to give kids a bit more freedom and liberty to grow in confidence.

[BB100]

Dulwich_ Park_ Fairy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So are adults being selfish when they leave the

> house in the morning hoping someone will come to

> their aid if they get run-over? Do you leave home

> with a trained paramedic?

>

> Now we're just descending into the ridiculous.

> Raise your game.

Not really. If an adult gets run over most human beings would help. And the same for a child. So why then is it selfish to expect the child will get help but not selfish for the adult? Children are human beings too. I follow your line of reasoning but it is going down the lines of 'why should adults help children when their parents should be doing it?' But then why do adults help adults when they are in trouble? The same rule of humanity applies to both children and adults.

[BB100]

HeidiHi Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I don't think Stats is a good way of protecting

> yourself. it does not> exempt anyone from having the same thing happening

> to them.

This is true. However they are helpful for getting things into a clearer perspective. However there is a distinct possibility that the stats are good becuase we are all supervising our children!

> if the parents really

> believe in entrusting their kids ability to go to

> school unsupervised, why do they not let them

> return home unsupervised?

Because they don't trust them with the keys or being home alone?? Sorry for being wry here - even I struggle with the idea of the biking infants - however the facts are there are more risks in the home than on the street.