Would parents today send children away in a wartime evacuation?

[Rainallnight]

If there was another evacuation of children out of the cities, would you send yours?

I’m reading Goodnight Mister Tom to DD and of course it’s thrown up all sorts of chat about evacuees.

DD asked if I’d send her to the countryside and my first reaction was that I definitely wouldn’t. But then I thought, would anyone? People are much less biddable these days, have a different view of parenting and childhood, along with safeguarding etc.

I know the scenario is unlikely to arise given how different modern warfare is still interested in asking!

@amylou8 "In 2026 with a job, a bank balance and a car, I'd be making alternative arrangements to keep them safe."

But if there was full scale war then your life and everyone else's would change immeasurably. You job and your bank balance might not exist, or at the very least would be severely impacted. There might not be petrol for a car and freedom of mobility would most likely be controlled. You can't possibly assume that your life would stay exactly the same.

Same here, initial instinct was that we'd go stay with my parents in the Scottish countryside, and if I couldn't go with them for whatever reason then I'd be happy to send them alone because they'd be with their grandparents. To strangers? Much harder to say.

Bombing was more about wiping out infrastructure and preventing a country from functioning (and therefore fighting a war) than simply killing as many people as possible. For that reason it would still be much more dangerous to be in a major city than Harrogate or Merthyr Tydfil, just the same as being in Kyiv is more dangerous than a small town in the Ukrainian countryside.

People have short memories and underestimate what it was like to live with the reality of the Blitz. If it was a choice between sending your child to live with complete strangers (and the real risks that brings) or the equally very real risk that they would be killed or maimed by a bomb, it's not as clear cut a choice as some are making out.

Bombing scarred psychologically too even if you weren't physically hurt. My dad was a toddler during the war and was terrified of aeroplanes (any aeroplanes) overhead for his entire life.

Yes. I would rather she was living somewhere else in safety than in a city centre at risk of being bombed constantly. The city I live in now was heavily bombed during WW2 whole sections completely obliterated and had to be fully re-built.

They would be arrested and put in prison like conscientious objectors were and rationing isn’t a choice it’s a necessity because the food doesn’t exist, it doesn’t really matter whether you feel like your human rights are being respected or not.

I think London was bombed every night for 9 months in the blitz - I could be wrong on that but if anyone is interested they can look it up.

It was September 1940 to May 1941. There may have been the odd night off.
29 December 1940 was known as the second great fire of London because of the intensity of the raids and the fires - in the City, not just the docks.

Bombing was more about wiping out infrastructure and preventing a country from functioning (and therefore fighting a war) than simply killing as many people as possible.

Not necesarily. A lot of the bombing of London was quite indiscriminate, not just aimed at the docks. And the Baedeker raids of 1942 targeted historic towns and cities.

There’s not enough space in prison for rapists and murders! What makes you think they can put anyone else in prison?

Don't people still do that today?

There are probably many who have sent their children with relatives/other people who claim the child as their own.

There are hardly any legal routes, but I imagine that if there were many in war torn countries would send their children to try and save their lives.

https://www.refugeecouncil.org.uk/get-help/independent-unaccompanied-asylum-seeking-children-support-service-iuss/

https://www.unhcr.org/hk/en/unaccompanied-children

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2021/690575/EPRS_BRI(2021)690575_EN.pdf

Of course I'd send them.

The laws would be altered to cope with wartime conditions. Not enough prison space? Camps could be built or buildings requisitioned. Rationing would be implemented. Our rights would be curtailed to suit the situation. Let's not forget kinder transport. Can't imagine putting my child on a train never to see her again but might be her only chance to survive.

The prison population would be redeployed to the armed forces where possible, to work if they couldn’t fight and only the worst of the worst would remain incarcerated like we know it now. They wouldn’t just let able bodied men stay in prison if they needed those able bodies elsewhere.

Do you really have that much faith in the uk government and armed forces to pull that off? We’re a soft touch and a joke of the world.

@Sartre "I don’t think a lot of it would fly nowadays, I can’t see many Gen Z’s signing up to go to war for starters nor their parents allowing them. Rationing would also be against human rights."

They wouldn't get the luxury of "signing up", they'd be conscripted or thrown into special prison camps. And in an abject state of international emergency I really don't think mummy and daddy "not allowing" them would actually go very far. As for rationing and human rights. If food supplies were critically depleted due to lack of imports (amongst a whole host of other wartime factors) then you could protest your human rights until you're blue in the face. There wouldn't be enough food to go round, simple as that, so a fair distribution system is the only answer. In fact anyone protesting otherwise would probably get lynched by an angry mob.

Can I recommend this 'Play for Today'? It is fiction but I think is based on some real experiences.

I think evacuation was not a 'one size fits all', the Channel Islanders had very little time to decide to send their children away and because of occupation there were not many opportunities to exchange letters.

My dad's next door neighbours wen to the Channel Islands for a holiday, they were queuing to get in somewhere and the person on the gate asked where they were from then let them in for free because evacuees from CI had been well looked after.

My grandmother was married before the war so that left an empty bed in her house.

The next door neighbour came to see my great grandmother, at the, I think they were called 'reception centre' there was a group of children from London, the eldest was a girl and then there were 3 or 4 boys. The girl, Polly had instructions that they were only to be billeted with a catholic family and that they were not to be split up.

Polly spent the war mostly with her brothers, next door and then sleeping, in what had been my grandmother's bed.

My grandmother's sister and Polly were still writing to each other as adults.