Ok I'm having trouble finding the link on my phone.
GMA just had a story on a family in moco that is being investigated for neglect because they let their 6 and 10 yo walk a mile home from the park alone. They were stopped by police and then CPS was called.
I feel like I have to be more afraid of other parents calling the police/CPS because they don't agree with my approach to parenting than I do of actual strangers who may try to kidnap my kid.
I feel like I have to be more afraid of other parents calling the police/CPS because they don't agree with my approach to parenting than I do of actual strangers who may try to kidnap my kid.
I feel like I have to be more afraid of other parents calling the police/CPS because they don't agree with my approach to parenting than I do of actual strangers who may try to kidnap my kid.
And I rolled my eyes hard at "free range kid ID cards".
I was in 5th grade when I was 10 and regularly walking a mile home from school in NYC all alone, gasp!
Not a parent, but this is so relative. Kids in urban cities start catching the bus and walking long distances all of the time, because they have to. You teach your kid to be safe and keep it moving.
Not every kids goes to their assigned school, and even when they do, it can involve a walk, or gasp, catching public transportation all by their lonesome.
Like you, I started walking a mile or so to the bus stop, and then catching the bus across town when I was ten. It was the norm.
Post by MadamePresident on Jan 16, 2015 8:51:43 GMT -5
I guess the kids are supposed to stay indoors playing video games and eating Cheetos while drinking Mt Dew. Because at least then they would be "safe". That unsupervised walk was just terribly life threatening. The park in my idyllic suburban neighborhood is 1 mile from my house. I guess I'll not be allowed to let my kids go on their own until they can drive there.
Seriously though if the kid cant walk a mile away from their house how are they supposed to ride bikes? Are they just supposed to go back and forth on their own street, never out of eye view of their home? Two of them together walking to a defined place doesn't seem terribly unsafe.
I think the problem in this case is the six year old not the ten year old. In Maryland you have to be eight to be left unsupervised, and twelve or thirteen (this is unclear) to count as supervision to an under eight year old.
I do feel like this is a waste of resources. In Baltimore we couldn't get CPS to take a case of long term well documented neglect that resulted ******trigger warning******* in an infant dying.
CPS spokesperson Mary Anderson told Yahoo Parenting she could not comment on the specifics of the case, but explained that CPS is bound by law to “follow up on every complaint” it receives, using the Maryland Unattended Children Law for guidance to determine whether a parent “has provided proper care and supervision.”
Oh yes. I'm glad CPS is so diligent and never lets anything slip through the cracks...
This case seems like a good use of their time too.
Well, in ny anyways, someone makes a call to the state central registry to make an allegation of child abuse or neglect. If what they're alleging happened would be considered child abuse or neglect if true then the registry accepts it and the local agency is bound by law to investigate it. I imagine this is similar - for whatever paranoid reason someone felt the need to call this in, and the person taking the report couldn't say for sure if the Maryland law about unsupervised under8s applied, so they had to take the case and now investigate. Hopefully that will be all that happens.
I think this case is silly and these kids are safe. But it does upset me the way CPS investigations hit the news when educated white people with money get investigated but so rarely for business as usual for poor people of color.
I can't even. I have very strong feelings on this, but I am tired this morning.
I see nothing wrong with a 6 and a 10 year old walking somewhere with parental knowledge and permission, and hope to do similar things with our kids someday.
I think the problem in this case is the six year old not the ten year old. In Maryland you have to be eight to be left unsupervised, and twelve or thirteen (this is unclear) to count as supervision to an under eight year old.
I do feel like this is a waste of resources. In Baltimore we couldn't get CPS to take a case of long term well documented neglect that resulted ******trigger warning******* in an infant dying.
CPS wouldn't *investigate*? There's more to this story because there's no way in hell a case of an infant dying in questionable circumstances didn't warrant an investigation.
My 9 year walks my 6 year old around my neighborhood all the time. I have one neighbor who hates it and reminded my husband that there are teenagers at night who have done pranks like move flower urns from one persons yard and put it in another.
Because clearly they are looking to kidnap children as well.
Makes me lose my mind.
Though I don't let him take her to the subdivision park since it is by the woods and she would wander.
Post by chickens987 on Jan 16, 2015 9:07:26 GMT -5
This is getting lots of buzz, since it's essentially in my neighborhood. I don't think I would have personally called the police (more likely I would have approached the kids and made sure they weren't lost), but I have zero idea what these kids look like - it's very likely they don't LOOK 6 and 10 and some person thought they were younger and genuinely feared for their safety. Taking it any farther, I think, is ridiculous, but I think (hope) the parents are aware enough of the issues that they could be prepared for something like this to happen. I mean, if you leave your dog in a car while you run into a store, someone might break your window.
As a side note, I think the car accident analogy is totally ridiculous - yes, more kids are injured in car accidents than walking down the street, but you also take appropriate precautions to ensure that they're safe while in a car. Shouldn't you take those same precautions when allowing them to walk around? (I imagine I'd let my kids walk around when they were mature enough, but you bet your ass I'd put GPS on them)
Re; The below, we're not talking about an idyllic suburban neighborhood, at all in this case.
You can switch to street view to see that it has a lot of office buildings some abandoned storefronts, you have to walk under the train tracks at one point, and just a few years ago (4?) a crazy guy walked into the lobby of Discovery and opened fire.
I guess the kids are supposed to stay indoors playing video games and eating Cheetos while drinking Mt Dew. Because at least then they would be "safe". That unsupervised walk was just terribly life threatening. The park in my idyllic suburban neighborhood is 1 mile from my house. I guess I'll not be allowed to let my kids go on their own until they can drive there.
Seriously though if the kid cant walk a mile away from their house how are they supposed to ride bikes? Are they just supposed to go back and forth on their own street, never out of eye view of their home? Two of them together walking to a defined place doesn't seem terribly unsafe.
I think the problem in this case is the six year old not the ten year old. In Maryland you have to be eight to be left unsupervised, and twelve or thirteen (this is unclear) to count as supervision to an under eight year old.
I do feel like this is a waste of resources. In Baltimore we couldn't get CPS to take a case of long term well documented neglect that resulted ******trigger warning******* in an infant dying.
CPS wouldn't *investigate*? There's more to this story because there's no way in hell a case of an infant dying in questionable circumstances didn't warrant an investigation.
I think she meant they wouldn't investigate the allegations of abuse until the death occurred.
Post by Willis Jackson on Jan 16, 2015 9:21:14 GMT -5
I was getting lunch with the kids at Whole Foods last week. In the booth next to us were two boys, probably 5 and 7. One of them said to me, "We're all alone because we're big boys!" and I thought a parent must be in the restroom because it's right next to the play/dining area. I thought that was very free range of them. Some time passed and no one came, so I decided to keep an eye on them.
Eventually I realized their parents were sitting 3 booths down, enjoying a nice quiet lunch while keeping an eye on their kids, and the kids felt like hot shots because they were being trusted to eat alone. When the mom came over to help them clean up I praised her for her brilliance.
(I imagine I'd let my kids walk around when they were mature enough, but you bet your ass I'd put GPS on them)
OMG SERIOUSLY? GPS for a walk around the neighborhood?
what kind of twilight zone have I stepped into?
It looks like a fine place to be walking - crosswalks, densely populated, wide sidewalks. This whole scenario is ridiculous.
Look, I fully accept that I am different from 90% of the board in that I grew up in an inner-city neighborhood. I was never allowed to go further than the end of my street unsupervised. I live in a "safe" neighborhood now, where I laugh at people getting up in arms about people knocking on their doors after dark, but AT THIS POINT IN TIME, I imagine that I will want to make sure I know where my kids are at all times, even if they're "unsupervised".
I think the problem in this case is the six year old not the ten year old. In Maryland you have to be eight to be left unsupervised, and twelve or thirteen (this is unclear) to count as supervision to an under eight year old.
I do feel like this is a waste of resources. In Baltimore we couldn't get CPS to take a case of long term well documented neglect that resulted ******trigger warning******* in an infant dying.
CPS wouldn't *investigate*? There's more to this story because there's no way in hell a case of an infant dying in questionable circumstances didn't warrant an investigation.
Sorry if my first post wasn't clear. I believe that the unresponsiveness by CPS to earlier claims of neglect ended in the tragic and unnecessary death of the baby. Let me start at the beginning.
We had a seventh grader, who came to school inappropriately dressed, hungry, dirty, and without proper materials every day. It went beyond him just being a child in poverty. He was not getting the care he needed. The social worker, lets call her Mary, at the school provided some support, but the mother was not responsive. Mary called CPS to report neglect. Cps replied that there wasn't enough evidence, that neglect needs to be documented over a period of time and well established before they will take the case.
Mary continued to document and work with the child. She went on several home visits. She noted that the house was not up to code. She called CPS, again nothing. She started calling every other day. She had me call. Something was just not right, mom continued to refuse support. The student was falling further and further behind, he was angry, he felt neglected. CPS refused to take the case.
On a Thursday we had an IEP meeting. Mom was not there. We discussed the situation again. I brought up the fact that there was a four year old with significant documented disabilities who wasn't receiving any services and thought we could get CPS to investigate that way. We were all really worried, and CPS continued to refuse the report.
That Saturday the four year old was playing with matches and set the apartment on fire. Mom, and the seventh grader both thought the other had the baby. She died of smoke inhalation before anyone could get to her.
About the only thing I don't find ridiculous is CPS talking to the kids at school without the parents permission. CPS investigates potential child abuse, of course they should be able to talk to kids without the parents being able to prevent it.
Nice thing to do: "Hey, are you two okay? Where are your parents?" Asshole thing to do: "Hi, 911, I see two children WALKING ALONE."
I hope that if my kids are out alone, people ARE watching out for them. But in a real, useful way that keeps them safe, not in an asshole passive way that gets me a CPS investigation. Why can't we actually help each other out instead of assuming the worst?
Nice thing to do: "Hey, are you two okay? Where are your parents?" Asshole thing to do: "Hi, 911, I see two children WALKING ALONE."
I hope that if my kids are out alone, people ARE watching out for them. But in a real, useful way that keeps them safe, not in an asshole passive way that gets me a CPS investigation. Why can't we actually help each other out instead of assuming the worst?
I think this is key too. My parents let me & my sister walk around the corner in NYC before they let us in DC - because they could see us to a certain point, and then the doorman of the building on the corner would keep an eye on us. In DC, we didn't have those kinds of neighbors or relationships with people.
That's the other thing that I consider different about this case - there are tons of parks within a mile of their house (speaking generally, since I don't know EXACTLY where they live), where the kids would be walking around residential areas, seeing people they know/who are used to seeing them, where people would make sure they were ok. They went to one that wasn't.
OMG SERIOUSLY? GPS for a walk around the neighborhood?
what kind of twilight zone have I stepped into?
It looks like a fine place to be walking - crosswalks, densely populated, wide sidewalks. This whole scenario is ridiculous.
Look, I fully accept that I am different from 90% of the board in that I grew up in an inner-city neighborhood. I was never allowed to go further than the end of my street unsupervised. I live in a "safe" neighborhood now, where I laugh at people getting up in arms about people knocking on their doors after dark, but AT THIS POINT IN TIME, I imagine that I will want to make sure I know where my kids are at all times, even if they're "unsupervised".
My husband and I grew up in the city too, as did some PPs upthread. The general consensus seems to be that city kids gain this independence faster, as they have to walk or take public transport to school instead of being driven.
I just dont understand willingly giving up the benefits of allowing your kids independence (there are proven psychlogical and developmental benefits to be gained when kids know they're on their own) for the one in a million shot that you might prevent a kidnapping. Never mind that kids are so much more likely to be hurt by people they know and trust than a stranger. It's just so illogical it boggles the mind.
Oh, FFS. I need more caffeine before I can even begin to respond to the idiocy. For now, I'm just liking @tokenhoser's comment and saying that this is symptomatic of what is wrong with our society. This shit pisses me off so much.
I haven't read all the replies on here but this is ridiculous. CPS is so backwards! I've called about much, MUCH worse and they don't do anything and just say there isn't enough info to investigate. Even though a 6 year old can tell a very detailed story AND has physical marks that back up her story. Repeatedly. But nope, supposedly their "hands are tied and can't do anything".
I feel like I have to be more afraid of other parents calling the police/CPS because they don't agree with my approach to parenting than I do of actual strangers who may try to kidnap my kid.
CPS wouldn't *investigate*? There's more to this story because there's no way in hell a case of an infant dying in questionable circumstances didn't warrant an investigation.
Sorry if my first post wasn't clear. I believe that the unresponsiveness by CPS to earlier claims of neglect ended in the tragic and unnecessary death of the baby. Let me start at the beginning.
We had a seventh grader, who came to school inappropriately dressed, hungry, dirty, and without proper materials every day. It went beyond him just being a child in poverty. He was not getting the care he needed. The social worker, lets call her Mary, at the school provided some support, but the mother was not responsive. Mary called CPS to report neglect. Cps replied that there wasn't enough evidence, that neglect needs to be documented over a period of time and well established before they will take the case.
Mary continued to document and work with the child. She went on several home visits. She noted that the house was not up to code. She called CPS, again nothing. She started calling every other day. She had me call. Something was just not right, mom continued to refuse support. The student was falling further and further behind, he was angry, he felt neglected. CPS refused to take the case.
On a Thursday we had an IEP meeting. Mom was not there. We discussed the situation again. I brought up the fact that there was a four year old with significant documented disabilities who wasn't receiving any services and thought we could get CPS to investigate that way. We were all really worried, and CPS continued to refuse the report.
That Saturday the four year old was playing with matches and set the apartment on fire. Mom, and the seventh grader both thought the other had the baby. She died of smoke inhalation before anyone could get to her.
This is a very very sad story. I do wonder why CPS didn't investigate...it could come down to how the call was phrased, but in NY I could absolutely call with those allegations and get an investigation started. Do you know whether the family had had previous involvement with CPS? HOWEVER, unless something major turned up on investigation, it would at best be a services case not a removal. Very sadly, in hindsight you wonder if removing the children could have prevented the tragic death. But every removal causes so much trauma itself, you can't place kids in foster care for many neglect situations. No one knows which of the thousands are going to end up being the one where something happens.
I am a social worker and work (well, not at this exact moment, but for years past and intend to continue in future) with families who are involved in abuse/neglect situations. We had a family a few years ago who had a similar incident occur, without the tragic ending. Kids were I think 7, 5, and 2, and both older kids have disabilities, and left home alone while mom went to work. 7 year old started a bunk bed on fire and the whole apartment was destroyed but thankfully all of the people involved were saved. Only in this situation mom had several previous indicated cases for lack of supervision... but she plead a good case every time because she truly loved her children and provided good care for them in many other ways. It's hard. Kids were put in foster care after the fire of course.
Is the world more dangerous than it was a few generations ago? Maybe, marginally. In some ways, yes, in others, no. But you know what is definitely worse than a few generations ago? How people just want to be voyeurs to the fucked-up shit that happens. Most people don't want to actually help. They want to document, they want to see something go viral, they want to be able to say they "saw it first," they want to feel superior, but no, they don't want to actually be helpful in any meaningful way, because that takes real effort. Like @tokenhoser said, if you're legitimately concerned, help *then*, in the moment. If you're concerned but truly fear for your own safety if you intervene, then OK, call in the professionals. This case I'm positive is not one of the latter. So yeah, eff that.