One-Ninth The Freedom Kids Used to Have

Hi Readers — This is from an article by Tim Gill in The Guardian last week. Tim is a friend, an activist, a blogger and author of No Fear, a book examining what it means to grow up in a completely risk averse society. In the article I’m quoting from, he’s talking about how there’s an annual bird count (presumably to find out which birds are thriving, which are endangered), but maybe what we need now is an annual “child outside” count:

The ecology of children apparently being less interesting than that of birds, there is little hard data around. We do have Mayer Hillman’s classic One False Move, a study of children’s independent mobility. It suggests that, in a single generation, the “home habitat” of a typical eight-year-old — the area in which children are able to travel on their own — has shrunk to one-ninth of its former size. Do not underestimate the significance of this change: for the first time in the 4 million-year history of our species, we are effectively trapping children indoors at the very point when their bodies and minds are primed to start getting to grips with the world outside the home.

The mission of Free-Range Kids — as you can tell from its name — is liberating kids from this new, unnecessary, frustrating, debilitating caged existence. Onward!! L.

Yikes! It's the non-indoors!

 

Blind and Free-Range

Hi Readers — This is an inspiring column by Peter White, an English broadcaster who’s blind. It reminds me that our job as parents is to believe in our kids — to believe they can rise to a challenge.

On the road (and as I film my reality show), I hear from a lot of parents who think it is dangerous to let their kids do anything on their own — walk to school, babysit, take a bus, you name it — because they might get hurt or frustrated. I hope that some of those parents read this essay, because here’s what happens when we DO say (heart in throat): “Go for it, honey.”  We pick up where Mr. White is recalling how his mom let him learn how to ride a bike:

I didn’t understand it then, but I know now it took great courage for her to do what she did. The interesting thing is that the special blind boarding schools to which we were sent were equally uninhibited. At my secondary school in Worcester we were positively encouraged – no, actually forced – to go out alone, or accompanied only by another blind friend. The 4 o’clock walk was compulsory: nobody asked where you were going, or whether you had the skills to get there. And when things went wrong, the school faced them with almost unbelievable sang-froid. When I was 12, I had a road accident. My parents were informed of this in a terse letter: “Peter has had a slight brush with a lorry. No serious harm done.”

After this incident, a few half-hearted rules were introduced about who should be allowed to wander about unsupervised, but they were quickly abandoned. Nothing interfered with the custom of Founder’s Day, where every pupil was given five shillings, and sent out for the day – a kind of ultimate 4 o’clock walk. I once managed to hitchhike the 200 or so miles home to Winchester and back. Returning to school just after midnight, I received a mild reprimand, and congratulations for having had the initiative to enlist the help of the police in getting my last, after-dark lift. But I was far from the boldest. The school bred adventurers, roaming the city and beyond. There were always a handful with girlfriends, off to parties and pubs, clambering back into school at night up drainpipes and through windows.

It’s hardly surprising that, growing up in this environment, the world held few terrors for us.

Only one word besides “blind” occurs to me to describe those kids and ironically it’s this: Lucky. — L.

SANITY! England Recovers from Background Check Mania!

Hi Readers! This story is almost too exciting in its implications. England had been requiring background checks for anyone who had any contact with kids once week. (And the original proposal over there would have covered folks having any contact with kids once a MONTH. Sheesh!) The assumption, of course, was that predators are everywhere. Also, that predators all come with a rap sheet clearly labeled, “PREDATOR” and thus could be easily weeded out. The result? Any mom or dad who wanted to volunteer at school, or help out at Scouts, couldn’t do that unless they underwent “vetting.”

But over the summer the government halted the program to study whether it was doing any good or simply driving all adults away from all kids. The Home Secretary, Theresa May, actually called the program “draconian.”

And now it its being repealed! Employers will still be expected to screen their staffs, but that’s about half the people who would have been background checked under the old system.

Why is this such welcome news? Because as a society we have been so gripped with predator panic these past 20 years or so that we have stopped treating human/child interaction as anything other than pedophilia waiting to happen. As our fear for our children grew, we went beyond sensible caution over to rank paranoia. The result was to see all adults through the lens of, “Get away from my child, you creep!” Adults grew scared of kids, kids were told to distrust adults.

I’m hoping that Britain’s re-evaluation will be their shot heard ’round the world, making the rest of us stand back and say, “Wait! Maybe it is time to stop thinking the very worst of all adults, all the time.” Hail Britannia! — Lenore

Land of Monty Python and newly discovered sense!

“No Touch” Policy is Insane for Music Teachers

Hi Readers — I touched (ha ha — so to speak!) upon this issue in my Golden Helicopter Awards: The fact that the British Musicians Union has told its members (ha ha again) not to lay (ha ha) a finger on any child they are giving music lessons. Most cheeringly, England’s Education Secretary, Michael Grove, has called these restrictions daffy. Here’s some of his wisdom, via The Telegraph:

It plays to a culture of fear among both adults and children, reinforcing the message that any adult who touches a child is somehow guilty of inappropriate contact,” he said.

“If we stigmatise and seek to restrict all physical contact between responsible adults and children, we will only undermine healthy relations between the generations.

“If we play to the assumption that any physical contact is somehow suspect then we will make children more suspicious of adults and adults more nervous and confused about their role in our society.

“We will drive good people away from teaching for fear of crossing some arbitrary line and our children will lose out as fewer and fewer adults feel comfortable working with young people.”

Well said! Let’s not make the non-skeevy skeevy! — L

Stand Up & Cheer for the Flower Ladies!

Hi Readers! This is a story that’ll give you heart! Over in England, in Gloucester, there’s a cathedral. In this cathedral, a group of about 60 ladies volunteer as flower arrangers. They make the place beautiful. But, apparently, just by being HUMAN, they also make the place DANGEROUS. According to The Telegraph:

At issue seems to have been a bizarre fear that because the women shared a toilet with choirboys, there was a risk that paedophiles could infiltrate the flower guild. A vetting system that was set up to protect children and vulnerable adults thus appears to have mown down a cohort of mostly retired women, average age 70, who represent the backbone of Britain’s voluntary movement.

Yes, the fear is that someone among them might molest the boys with whom they share a bathroom! (Or with whom they WOULD share a bathroom, except the ladies are there during the hours when the choirboys are usually in school.) But anyway — to safeguard the boys, the ladies were told to undergo a background check, to make sure they weren’t convicted pedophiles.  This check was not legally required (see this follow-up story), but the church demanded it anyway. And the chairwoman of the guild, Annabel Hayter, refused.

RIGHT ON.

After she went public with her refusal, she was forced to resign.

FOR SHAME.

As she told The Telegraph, “It is offensive. The people who forced me to resign have had dinner at my house. They know me well. They are showing an incredible lack of trust and common sense… It is terribly sad but it’s also quite pathetic.”

It’s worse than pathetic. This deep distrust of any and all human beings is tearing at the fabric of society. For real. When we regard every adult as a potential child molester, we can’t trust anyone. We have to watch our children every second. And, by the way, whom DO we trust? The folks with papers?

After Annabel Hayter resigned, other flower ladies followed suit.  Now the country is taking note. According to The Telegraph, “The row has highlighted growing concern about the ‘overzealous’ use of Criminal Records Bureau checks, which critics say are deterring and demoralising volunteers across the country.”

I’m sure they are. It’s pretty demoralizing to say, “I’ve come to arrange the peonies,” and hear, “Not so fast, you possible perv!”

And so Annabel, I salute you. This could be the start of something big. Something that we all long for, but are increasingly told is unattainable, even dangerous. It’s called community — a group of people held together by trust and responsibility. A group of people not naive, but not hysterical either, working together, all different ages, to raise a new generation. Same as you’d raise a garden of flowers. — Lenore

Hey Kids, It’s Fireworks Time! Sort Of. Inside. On a Screen.

Hi Readers! In one English town, outdoor fireworks have been deemed too “dangerous” (and chilly) for kids to enjoy. So now the fireworks are inside, reports the Small World News Service:

Instead of wrapping up warm to enjoy the bangs of fireworks around 100 youngsters will sit inside watching images on a projector screen.

The virtual fireworks are accompanied by sounds of explosions, including ‘bangs’, ‘whistles’ and ‘crackles’ recorded from outdoor displays.

Childrens groups have accused the event’s organisers of subscribing to ”cotton wool culture” and killing off an important British tradition.

But organisers hailed their indoor bonfire night as ‘safer’ than big outdoor events, which must meet stringent council health and safety regulations.

How long before kids come inside after school to watch videos of other children playing in the park? Hey — it’s ALMOST the same thing. And it’s so safe! — Lenore

OTHER Outrage of the Day: School Cancels Some Recess Because It’s Noisy

Hi Readers! Here’s the latest nonsense (and it was reported by the BBC, not The Daily Mail): A grammar school in England decided to cut back on recess when neighbors complained it was too loud.

Why not cut back on, say, responding to outlandish complaints? Or on letting lawyers decide what to eviscerate fun from the school day? But no: The decision was made to take it out on the kids. After all, they don’t really have to run around, do they? It’s not like they’re primates or anything… — Lenore

Outrage of the Day: Dad Faces Legal Action for Not Walking 7 y.o. to Bus Stop

Hi Readers! Here’s today’s story from across the pond (thank you, Virtual Linguist, for sending it along): A father who lets his 7 year old daughter walk to and from the school bus stop has been threatened by the authorities who say they may report him to child protective services. And just how far away is the bus stop?

20 yards.

The girl has to cross what the dad calls a country lane on the way. He thinks it’s very safe. He thinks his daughter is capable of handling it. But apparently, the local county council does not. And while it was busy chastising him, it added that the girl was seen not wearing a sweater (or “jumper” as they call it over there) on a chilly day — further proof of gross parental negligence.

So I guess it is time to arrest all of us whose kids (like mine, this morning) don’t take a jacket even though we think they should.

And incidentally: as my post below this one was all about how the news only reports the most unusual events, let’s keep this weird one in perspective, too. While it seems to represent a trend toward institutionalizing overprotection, it’s not like most parents are being arrested for letting their kids walk to school.

(Possibly because most parents are DRIVING them. But that’s another story.) — L.

Outrage of the Week Reversed! Maybe All Men AREN’T Pervs, Airline Realizes

Hey Readers! Good news! You’ll recall that British Airways had a rule that forbid any adult male from sitting next to any minor who was not his own child. Blogged about it here. The (unstated) reason for the rule? ALL MEN ARE PERVERTS…until proven otherwise. And since there’s really no way TO  “prove otherwise,” they airline simply assumed the worst.

British Airways didn’t move women, it only moved men, perhaps believing that guys routinely use this time in a public space,  surrounded by lots of other passengers, and people walking through the aisles, and flight attendants, to prey upon young folks. It’s a lovely view of the world, and males in particular. But Mirko Fischer took exception. Here’s the story, from the BBC:

Last year he was on a flight from London back to his home in Luxembourg when his pregnant wife Stefanie asked him to swap seats so she could sit next to the window.

He took her middle seat but cabin crew, who mistakenly believed he was alone, told him to move back to his original seat as he had ended up sitting next to a boy he did not know.

In June Mr Fischer told the BBC: “I felt humiliated and outraged. They accuse you of being some kind of child molester just because you are sitting next to someone.”

Fischer sued the airline for sex discrimination — and won. Though the airline admitted sex discrimination only in this one case, it has changed its seating procedure and will now group unaccompanied kids together. (Avoid sitting in front of that row!)  Unlike many American litigants, Fischer didn’t sue for a lot of money and, in any event, he’s giving the damages he received plus about $5000 of his own money to charities that protect children.

Protect them from real dangers, that is: abuse, neglect, hunger. Not from the vast majority of men who — surprise! — have zero interest in having sex with young kids. — Lenore

An Idle Parent is A Good Parent

Hi Readers — You may enjoy this essay from The Telegraph by Tom Hodgkinson, author of The Idle Parent. His  points basically boil down to: Stay home on the weekends. Let your kids bring you breakfast in bed (they’ll want to do this because they are bored and it’s something fun to do). Don’t spend money on fancy kiddie entertainment (including everything from children’s carnivals to electronics), make your kids entertain themselves. But when you want to be involved, remember: There are lots of tickle games you can play while sitting on the couch.

The piece even includes an Idle Parent Manifesto at the end. A nice essay for a boiling July day. — Lenore (who intends to take more of this essay to heart)