Schonrock kids and unchaperoned "school run"

[Keef]

.

[david_carnell]

1/10 for doing it after I saw it.

And I don't talk down to you Keef. I just highlight flaws in your argument or when I think you're wrong. But I do that to lots of people on here and none of them seem to descend into the gutter or name-calling. And if they disagree then have a go back. But do it with logic and panache and rhetorical style. Not by being rude.

You have a big chip on your shoulder from somewhere or something and I clearly niggle you. But that's your issue, not mine.

Grow up, get over it and behave like an adult. If you don't like being taken to task, don't say anything.

[dulwichmum]

Keef dear heart, I will always like you.

I am still shocked by the councillors assertion about Southwark's numbers of cared for children as though it is evidence of quality of service. In case it has escaped his notice, Southwark is a borough with some of the most deprived areas in Europe. It therefor is no surprise that we have marked inequalities in health and access to healthcare, indices of deprivation off the scale etc. I have never attended a child protection case conference and heard or seen any sign of a local councillor - busy with their spreadsheets admiring the nice rows of data.

Southwark's child protection services are an accident waiting to happen and the fact that Mr Barber is not aware of this doesn't surprise me. He clearly knows as much about Southwark social workers/caseloads/services as he does about age appropriate behavior for children - probably off at some meeting, furthering his career while his wife raises his kids alone.

A woman who argues or debates with him is a whinger - nice! This forum is well known for its debate and banter. If you cant take the heat...

[SeanMacGabhann]

Is this thread still about them parents? Can it be? Good

[Keef]

And I don't talk down to you Keef. I just highlight flaws in your argument or when I think you're wrong.

Well okay, but I don't think I was wrong.

I don't usually call people names, but you get to me that much, I'll do my best in future to argue with logic and panache and rhetorical style, so that you might accept me for an equal, not something on the bottom of your shoe. You may not "stoop" to my gutter, but you do get personal, you just hide it behind your over confident persona on here.

"Grow up and behave like an adult" coming from someone about 5 years younger than me. And you say you don't talk down to me? You really do have no idea about anything real do you?

Anyway, back to the topic at hand then.

Edit to say that I have removed previous posts because I was letting myself get a bit angry. I'll not delete this, as it is a direct response to another post.

[citizenED]

A couple of pages ago I suggested that a few people on here need to take a step back before hitting "post message". Perhaps they also need to take a few deep breaths and count to 10.

[Alec John Moore]

Maybe this thread should go to the family room. It might help focus the minds of contributors but then again I've noticed a trend on most threads that they tend towards the personal, back biting at some stage in their progression. This is a shame since there has been lots of really valuable insight and balanced discussion amongst the mild hysteria, sorry, heightened emotional responses to a question which is a real, everyday concern for parents. I'm not prepared to judge the Schonrocks or the McCanns but these discussions help me reflect on my own parenting decisions. I will however point out that I found BB100's postings very useful in helping bring balance to the discussion. Having an objective assessment of risk should help us put our own concerns into perspective and make more rational decisions about how we behave but when it comes to the pressures and concerns for keeping our kids safe then the subjective perception of risk takes control. I bang on about safety first to my kids when doing the school run and I hope that it is working. The thing that gets me most is when motorists stop their car to let you cross the road in front of them when there are no other vehicles around and then get narked when you wave them on. Getting my kids across the road safely is my responsibility and it is obviously safer to cross when there are no vehicles on the road. Or am I missing some obscure aspect of road use etiquette here? I don't drive so perhaps it has passed me by.

[ImpetuousVrouw]

I have managed to get through all 9 pages of this and I'm a bit suprised by the posts of a couple of people I would normally agree with.

I was 9 when I was looking after my baby brother after my mum shut down with post-natal depression and I did a good job of looking after him until she recovered about 18 months later.

My own kids were brought up to look out for each other and whilst my son would have had no problems looking after a 5 year old sibling when he was 8, his sister would not.

Some kids are naturally more responsible and sensible than others. I think without actually knowing the kids and their respective abilities, personalities etc, it is very hard to make a judgement but in any event, it cannot possibly be as black and white as many posters have stated on here.

Hopefully the Schonrocks know their children very well and understand whhere their limits are.

I wish the family good luck and hope people will leave them to make the relevant judgements about their own children with a minimum of interference .

[ironjawcannon]

I think it is ok for the children to cycle, however only if they are chaperoned. Children under nine are not good at judging the speed of traffic. These days roads are busier. It is also too much responsibility for the 8 yr old to be caring for the 5yr old in these circumstances. (I don't think that stranger paedophiles are the issue here, there is too much fear about this, when, in fact children are more likely to be abused by someone they know)

[Narnia]

I'm not sure I understand this point. If a car stops to let you cross the road it is presumably stationery and ensures any traffic that may arrive behind it stops too. Whenever I've stopped to let parents/kids cross it's to help in a small way that they cross the road safely.

[buggie]

Narnia Wrote:

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

> >

> I'm not sure I understand this point. If a car

> stops to let you cross the road it is presumably

> stationery and ensures any traffic that may arrive

> behind it stops too. Whenever I've stopped to let

> parents/kids cross it's to help in a small way

> that they cross the road safely.

right, but it doesn't teach the child to judge car speed/when to cross safely - if all drivers stop randomly to let children cross they'll end up (worse possible senario) expecting this to happen whenever they cross the road. If at a crossing fine, but if children get use to cars stopping randomly, what reinforcement is there for them to use crossings?

[Alec John Moore]

It's a question of perspective and risk assessment. From my pedestrian, literally, point of view, it is safest to cross the road when there are no vehicles around. That's what I tell my kids. It also sometimes happens that the pedestrian can't read the intentions of the driver, particularly at junctions like the crossroads by the Uplands. Sometimes the light reflects on the windscreen so that the driver's facial expression and even hand movements are obscured. Drivers don't always take into account the interests of pedestrians when they are negotiating junctions so don't always indicate their intentions. I don't see what benefit there is to stopping to let people cross the road when you are the only car around. W hen there are other cars on the road the driver who has stopped is acting irresponsibly since they have no control over the actions of the other driver/s.My attitude is also probably coloured by an experience when crossing a zebra crossing a few years ago with my oldest child who was in the buggy. A big white van had stopped to let us cross and when we were half way over the car behind overtook but stopped when it saw us on the crossing. The driver was apologetic and mouthed that she was in a hurry to get her kids. My perception of danger and my risk assessment is based on personal experience, prejudice and perhaps an over weening concern for the safety of my children that is only tempered to a certain degree by statistical analysis that shows we are less at risk nowadays.

[Narnia]

What if there isn't a crossing? I live on a long road which doesn't have one crossing. But you are saying drivers should not stop to let children/parents cross. I can't get my head around that.

[tallulah71]

I have been a teacher for 13 years. I don't have children. I used to walk to primary school alone or with my friend at 5 + winter or summer.. If had a bike to ride to school, I would have ridden it gladly. Let's stop being Daily Mail and making it DANGEROUS for youngsters to ride to school in numbers - and yes, the pavement is allowed by the way. The more children who do this, in safe numbers with confidence, the better. What do you want? - more 4 x 4's? Bubble wrap??

[Mick Mac]

This is a great thread.

Not because of the issue, which has been done to death - but to see the big boys from the Lounge having a fight.....

I'd agree that 5 is too young to cycle to school - but I'd be absolutley fine with an 8 year old and a 5 year old walking the same route to school. But not a 5 year old alone.

The general point of over protective parenting drives me mad. The perception that a child that is not in your direct eyeline is in danger is a common feeling which smothers our children with protection and does not allow them to explore or enjoy their childhoods in the way they should.

[Jeremy]

Keef, DC - you're both decent blokes, but you're both partly to blame for winding each other up! So let's just call it a stalemate on this one.

Please bring back Huguenot, there was a man who knew how to talk down to people! How I'd cringe when I read his posts...

[schonrocks]

Thanks to all those who have expressed their support on this thread.

We got sick of being holed up in the house. 4 small kids in 4 walls is not fun after a while.

Some stuff for you to tear apart:

http://schonrocks.com/

Gillian & Oliver Schonrock

[citizenED]

Have to admit that David does talk down to Keef. That's the problem with being 6'5".

[Mick Mac]

I think most people would agree that on a subject like this, its not such a clear cut matter that there is a right answer for every family and therefore it should be for the parents to decide.

Certainly for under 10s to be allowed to cycle on the pavement would not inconveniece many people and would be a good interim step before children progress to the road. It would be good if that was the law.

I worry much more about a young child on a bike following a parent on a bike on a busy road than I would a child on its own cycling on a pavement to school.

Good luck in resolving this.

[Growlybear]

schonrocks Wrote:

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

> Thanks to all those who have expressed their

> support on this thread.

>

> We got sick of being holed up in the house. 4

> small kids in 4 walls is not fun after a while.>

> Some stuff for you to tear apart:

>

> http://schonrocks.com/

>

> Gillian & Oliver Schonrock

I fail to understand the relevance of the above comment. It doesn't matter how you dress up or try to justify your decision, you will not change the fundamental belief of many people who have participated in this thread that a five year old is too young to cycle a mile to school, crossing three roads, supervised only by an eight year old, and that by letting a child of this age cycle to school without an adult present is highly irresponsible.

You have presumably read the comments in this thread, and I would be very interested to know why you chose to bring this to the attention of the national press and put your children in the spotlight in this way.

[Santerme]

schonrocks Wrote:

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

> Thanks to all those who have expressed their

> support on this thread.

>

> We got sick of being holed up in the house. 4

> small kids in 4 walls is not fun after a while.

>

> Some stuff for you to tear apart:

>

> http://schonrocks.com/

>

> Gillian & Oliver Schonrock

Well to me that comes across like a thesis.

Beautifully constructed and well written with supporting evidence...very clinical.

I'll take my common sense approach over that every time.

[Mick Mac]

Growlybear Wrote:

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

> schonrocks Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Thanks to all those who have expressed their

> > support on this thread.

> >

> > We got sick of being holed up in the house. 4

> > small kids in 4 walls is not fun after a while.>

>

> > Some stuff for you to tear apart:

> >

> > http://schonrocks.com/

> >

> > Gillian & Oliver Schonrock

>

> I fail to understand the relevance of the above

> comment. It doesn't matter how you dress up or

> try to justify your decision, you will not change

> the fundamental belief of many people who have

> participated in this thread that a five year old

> is too young to cycle a mile to school, crossing

> three roads, supervised only by an eight year old,

> and that by letting a child of this age cycle to

> school without an adult present is highly

> irresponsible.

>

> You have presumably read the comments in this

> thread, and I would be very interested to know why

> you chose to bring this to the attention of the

> national press and put your children in the

> spotlight in this way.

Eh - I don't believe they did bring it to the national press initally, but are responding to allow their side of the story to be understood.

[Dulwich Born And Bred]

I find it quite clinical also, are your children social experiments to see if by letting them cycle a mile to school without an adult will result them in being well rounded adults because they took risks as a child and were given that kind of freedom at such a young age? This is not a five minutes walk to school, this is a one mile cycle where there are busy roads.

I fail to see your logic and reasoning behind your decision, I don't need stats, researchers and so on, to tell me that an eight year old supervising a five year old to school is right/safe when common sense says otherwise. There are many children who goes to school with an adult supervising, and I don't believe for one minute that they will grow up to be adults that have no idea how to cross the road, deak with certain situations, and will fear the world outside their door.

[Growlybear]

If the parents didn't contact the press, then I wonder who did?

[Horsebox]

Will Heidi Hi and Growlybear ever let this go? The more you both post the more it seems you have some other motive, other than a passing interest in something that has nothing to do with you whatsoever. Witchhunt much?