With rugrats and toddlers, nearly everything under the sun is a threat. Especially with a curious toddler who's parental units encourage adventure and discovery. You raise inquisitive children that way, but it takes YEARS off your life, especially when they enter their teens.

I knew or should have known where my kids were every minute of every day from age 0 through about 12. From 12-16 there is a transitional period in which daddy releases his iron-grip and encourages responsible independence. It also means you have to accept that they'll screw-up. From about 15 or 16 onward, they don't fully realize that they can tell you goodbye and hit the door forever. At 18, I tell them to hit the door. That is the end of my responsibility under law and it is the demarkation when they know they are on their own except for the grace of God Almighty and my good humor. I have control of one of those.

But that first dozen years is not theirs to lose, it is the parents'. If parents don't fully engage in their responsibility and do what is right, the child will suffer now and later. If parents do it willfully, then they are negligent.

Like, "Go outside and quit bothering me while I'm napping." That is the first step in negligence.

Bot

There is where we disagree. The lower age limit for what you are describing should be about six years of age.

In fact, I don't believe you personally ascribe to the above statement.

I don't believe that you knew exactly what your 11 year old was doing every minute of every day. How do I know this? Because you have a job and she goes to school. So, by definition, you are not being truthful here.

And, god forbid, if something happens to her on the way to or from school, you are going to consider yourself negligent?

I don't think so.

You can't treat an eight year old like a two year old. This will never work.

What about the negligence of the ********* father who called the police before searching his own property? If my daughter turned up missing and I called the police, I certainly wouldn't expect them to look under her bed. Also, just my O, but allowing access to a known deathtrap on your property seems every bit as negligent as granting small children access to a backyard swimming pool without supervision. It seems pretty obvious to me that the dad here is playing the well-worn blame-shifting game in the face of wrongful death suits and criminal charges.

Unless I make a joke, I rarely say what I don't believe without telling folks up-front. To do otherwise is intentional deceit which is a first-cousin to a lie.

I said what I meant. I believe as I stated. The only thing that maybe a bit out of line is that my wife and I both, as a team, share responsibility. One or both of us knows where our kids are, 24/7. As they get older, the knowledge gets more general. But under 11 or 12, I pretty much know what room they are in unless they are at a friend's house. If at a friend's, you can bet it is a parent whom I trust to be as watchful and careful as I am. I love it when parents stop by to check me out. I always check-out the parents of preteen children. As they get into their teen years I lighten-up an awful lot. But I still require parents' name, address, and a ground-line phone number.

It is my expectation that my kids will be at least as careful with their children, if they have some.

B

You carefully sidestepped the issue of attending school. You made no mention of going to school and returning from school.

Unless you, or your wife, drove the child directly to school, and deposited said child in the hands of a responsible teacher, and picked up the child immediately after school, and never let the child out of your sight on weekends, unless the child is with another responsible parent, then you are intentionally deceiving us.

In fact, the child, all the way up to your 12 year limit, would never be allowed to play with other children down the street, would never be allowed to go to the store, on their own, to purchase a container of milk, would never be allowed to go anywhere, or do anything, without a parent, or a designated parent, or teacher, watching their every minute.

You stated that you "know where they are 24/7". This is hardly the same as knowing exactly what they are doing 24/7. I'm guessing that the father of those kids knew where his son was........presumably playing with the other boys in the yard.

Yep, I'm stating intentional deceit. I don't believe that you can raise a child that strictly, especially if they are boys (I realize that yours are not).

At some points along teh way you cede parental responsibility. Like the aforementioend visits to teh homes of otehrs. And yes, school. In both cases I check-out teh situation and you can bet yer booty taht I'd never let my kids in a school that I thought was negligent toward my child's safety and same with another parent.

I have decided, by my own powers of telepathy, that you are lying to me.

B

See any conflict with the above statements? On one hand you claim to know exactly what the child is doing, every minute of every day, 24/7, up to age 12.

Then you back off and cede parental responsibility. But, even this would be acceptable, if true.

Please address the situation whereby the child is allowed to play, outside, in the yard, while the parent (or the parent of a friend) remains inside the house.

Please address the situation, where the child is allowed to go to a playground, unsupervised.


Sorry Dude, it's you who are bending the truth here.

Not really, you can choose the schools that you send your children to, you can do without the second income of a spouse to stay home, you can even home school. The point is that a parent has to make those decision with the childs interest at heart instead of their own.

whooooo nellie. er um I mean gidde up. right on target.

I even laughed at that one after i typed it :D

One thing thats for sure its easy to tell what parents take parenting seriously by how much they watch their own kids when other adults are around. There's nothing I hate more than a family stopping by and the parents get sloshed while we watch their kids.

They don't get the return invites.

You seem awfully passionate here. Am I stepping on some emotionally-charged toes?

Look, I explained about being careful with whom I let my kids visit. When they're really young I walked them to the house where they were to play and either fetched them or the other parent would bring them back. When they got older it was me standing outside watching them walk. (Oh yeah, when I say me, it also means my wife, we're interchangeable parts of the same parental machine). Later, it was a phone call upon arrival and departure. The same pattern repeats with the driver's license. Also, the kids grow-up understanding that there are evil people, especially men between teen-years and advanced age, who will steal them from their parents. And you teach the kid how to deal with problems. You start young and slowly reveal the full truth about evil people as they are more self-aware. By doing this, you give the kid the power of knowledge and rational response.

The chance of the kid getting snatched (the ultimate parental horror, IMO) under those circumstances is present, but vanishingly small. Because of that, the kid increasingly realizes personal responsibility.

So yeah, I know where my kids are. Partly from line of sight (when tehy're young) and later from trust, because I raised responsible, aware, and careful kids who are becoming reasonable, responsible, well-adjusted adults.

Failing to do these things with a child is negligence. If, after having done everything reasonable they still screw-up (and most kids do to some degree, especially in their teen years), it is not due to parental negligence.

Bot

Dont you think those who searched near the car have a tremendous amount of guilt also? Yet its ok for the negligent parents to heap abuse on them?

And I would bet dollars to donuts that if you tried to give these people any advice on parenting they would tell you to F off.

Allow me to add that the manifestation, if not the actual level of parental responsibility, varies with regard to environment. Raising children on a farm, for example, presents a different set of responsibilities than raising them in a low-income inner city neighborhood.

You speaking for him? :confused:

He sidestepped the issue of going to and returning from school.

You can do whatever you want, but, under any "normal" circumstances, you are not going to keep a 10 year old under your watchful eyes 24/7. This was his premise and it is false.