7yo often home alone in the morning, WWYD? If anything?

[Hufflepuzzpig]

I genuinely don't know. Neighbour's DS (nearly 8 but acts very young for his age) always goes in the car with his mum in the evening to pick up his dad from work, and he's not allowed to stay home/on the shared front lawn on his own while his mum goes.

In the mornings though, DH has noticed the DS is never with them, so the mum comes back and then takes him to school. I guess he must still be asleep or just doesn't get dressed on time or doesn't want to go.

Is that ok at that age? I wouldn't leave a 7yo home alone, but I expect many do and I don't think it's as terrible as DH does. He is generally more paranoid/helicoptery than me though. I know it's a really subjective issue, and the age at which parents let DCs be home alone varies massively.

I'd be happy for him to just come over for that time (about 30mins) in the mornings, even if he's in his PJs, should I suggest it? We don't know the parents that well, they are lovely but very shy and his mum in particular struggles with English. I could suggest it to the DS though, he likes it here.

I guess what I'm basically asking is - is nearly-8 old enough for this to be absolutely none of my business and I (and DH!) should chill because it's fine? Or is it a bit young to be home alone even for a short time?

Of course it is common sense not to leave a young DC, but we are talking about a nearly 8yr old who knows the neighbour, knows the rules, can be trusted and has common sense. If your DC doesn't have any of that-don't do it! (but try and let them aquire those things when you are there -not just write them off as useless and irresponsible).

Anyone would think you were leaving them for an hour without being able to contact or having help within yards! It is 20 mins, with a mobile and a close neighbour-who is in and awake!

My first reaction to the op was that 7 is too young, I leave my 13 and 11 year old often for short periods, say 1 or 2 hours, they have mobiles and we have good neighbours. My 9 year old gets left for max 30mins with the older two, my 6 year old never as I don't want to put the responsibility on to my 13 year old. If there was a problem she couldn't deal with such as choking or electrocution, she would never get over it, and neither would we.

But, bizarrely I let them walk to school from age 8, as this is normal around here. I think that is because I see the main danger as traffic and they are well trained in road safety.

I can't believe that no one reacted to an earlier post (can't remember who) saying that midwives shouldn't qualify if they haven't had children. That's outrageous- what about male midwives and people who choose not to have children or are infertile, or can't afford a family on their wages?

"resistant to accept that there are valid reasons that kids this age are just too young and unpredictable."

I'm not resistant, honestly. I just don;t know what the valid reasons are, and nobody has told me what they are. Tell me why I shouln't do it and I'll start loading him into the car again.

saying that midwives shouldn't qualify if they haven't had children.

I missed that one! It is outrageous-(and I can't see the relevance).

I've said many times that kids aren't 100% predictable 100% of the time. The response has been "my kids wouldn't do x, y or z." I have said that kids don't know how to deal with things they have no experience of. I have also said that the OP should be the emergency contact, cos the point is that there is currently no emergency contact in this case.

My point is, it doesn't remotely matter what I say is a valid reason, I will be mocked and criticised for wanting to be within hearing distance of my child shouting for me if something did happen.
Have none of your kids fallen in the house, or broken something?

Have you never fallen in the house or broken something with only the DC there? I fell badly enough to have to go to A&E-luckily I was conscious but I can quite see that 9yr old DS might have had to use common sense and cope. It was a huge worry as a lone parent that something might happen to me.

I've only left ds (7) on two occasions that I can think of (1. he was off school ill, I nipped to the nearby shop & 2. I left him watching the telly whilst I dropped a parcel round to a friend who lives 5 minutes away).

However, that's not so much because I wouldn't expect him to be absolutely fine, as because I also have 2 younger dds & usually they'd be in the house too.

I would be more than happy to leave ds for half an hour or so. He is perfectly sensible, & if I were to be involved in that famous car crash & be delayed, as opposed to dead, he'd be quite capable of knocking up a neighbour or ringing his grandma.

Actually, dd1 is 5 & she could manage that! I wouldn't put that to the test - I think KS2 is definitely my personal watershed for 'age when dc can be left briefly' - but she would be quite capable.

That said, I teach some 12 year olds whom I wouldn't trust alone for the time it'd take to answer the phone or go to the loo...

It's a parental judgment call. I'd be terribly surprised if SS had time to prioritise a 7 year old left in the circumstances in the OP, though.

I agree with you vmcd28!

Of course a seven year old shouldn't have to handle an emergency..however many do and many cope around the world. However it's all risk assessment isn't it? Much less risk when in the morning he wants to lie in bed then leaving in the evening when he's bored.
Guidelines are lax because at the end of the day being a parent is down to you.You need to make your choices.
As a neighbour, just be aware of a child next door that may be alone. It doesn't warrant outrage. I won't leave a seven year old because I couldn't live with it...doesn't mean that seven year old's can't cope with 30 mins alone in the morning..just means I'M not up to excepting the guilt!

According to RoSPA, in 2002 (the last year I can find figures for) 12,649 children between the ages of 5 - 14 suffered an accident in the home which resulted in Concussion/Unconsciousness. An unconscious child cannot go for/telephone for help and in many cases, neither can a concussed child.This compares with 7,831 children of the same age being injured in a RTA in the same year. On those figures, I'd be taking my child with me, whether they want to go or not. Others, of course, will do as they please. As a parent, I cannot always be 100% sure my child will be safe. I can however, take the course of action which, statistically, has the least risk. My child deserves nothing less.

I bet all those accidents were Dads chasing them round the dining room and getting them over-excited. That's the only time we've ever had accidents requiring A and E. Over enthusiastic adults.

"Dads chasing them round the dining room"

barrel scrape

vcmd, noone is denying that an age exists where children are not capable of being left alone

nor, I imagine, does anyone deny that an age comes where children have to become more independent despite the fact that accidents can still happen

the only thing we disagree on is what age is appropriate for certain types of independence

my own feeling is that children between say 7 and 12 are often more sensible and more responsible than teenagers- but of course it is still harder to deny teenagers some measure of responsibility

frantic51 Sat 16-Jul-11 23:05:42
"According to RoSPA, in 2002 (the last year I can find figures for) 12,649 children between the ages of 5 - 14 suffered an accident in the home which resulted in Concussion/Unconsciousness."

Yes, but it is a fair bet that quite a few 15-25yos also suffered such injuries. And a concussed 25yo clearly cannot phone for help either. So what does it prove- that noone should ever be left alone anywhere?

What I ask myself before I leave home is: is my 11yo more likely to suffer an injury rendering him incapable because he is 11 than I myself would be if alone in the house? And with my knowledge of him, the answer to that would have to be no. In other words, I would want to know what the accident statistics of telly-watching 11os are, as opposed to accident statistics of any other age group whilst slumped in front of the television, before I decide whether it is irresponsible to leave him because he is 11 (or 10 or 8).

And following this line of reasoning, I could find plenty of arguments to suggest that a lone toddler would be specially unsafe- but not a sensible 11yo or 8yo. Ds is no less safe in the house now than he will be in 8 years time- and then I'm going to have to let him move from home.

Unfortunately RoSPA don't offer figures for children aged 15 - 18 but their figures for 15 - 64 year olds are 21,033 in the same year. This is not even double the figures for the 5 - 14 year olds yet I would suggest that, given the age range, the second group is many times more than the first generally. All seems to point to the fact that 5 - 14 year olds are far more likely to have an accident in the home than teenagers and adults. No doubt the majority of the accidents happen to the younger end of this age group but, for me, 7 is uncomfortably near that end of the group and therefore too young to be left in the house alone for any length of time.

*many times larger not more.

I mean that the figures seem to bear out the fact that a significantly larger percentage of children aged 5 - 14 do, in fact have accidents in the home than teenagers or adults.

To me, there is such a massive difference between a 4yo and a nearly 8yo that I wouldn't even begin to compare them. I would not leave a 4yo alone. Though to be truthful, all the accidents my dcs have ever had have been right in front of my eyes; they have never come to any harm when left alone. I can only surmise that they are more careful when on their own (or lazier, which is another way of keeping safe )

I'm not talking about a 4 year old. There's a fair bit of difference between a 4 year old and a 5 year old, as there is between a 5 year old and a 6 year old etc. etc. However, the figures from RoSPA are self evident. A much larger percentage of 5 - 14 year olds have accidents in the home which result in concussion/unconsciousness than do teens and adults, and no amount of individual, anecdotal evidence can alter those figures. You feel like taking a risk with your 7 year old and I certainly wouldn't. You are at liberty to think me over protective and I am at liberty to think what I think.

I wouldn't judge anyone for not choosing to leave their nearly 8yo alone at home, frantic, and I never said I would.

I just resent the idea of my whole culture being judged irresponsible.

And fwiw you haven't shown me any stats that prove that more accidents happen to 8yos than to 15yos. The fact that the RPSCA have chosen to group these particular ages together doesn't prove that there is a genuine line that goes between 14yos and 15yos.

Even if you did show me stats that seem to suggest that e.g. more 8yos than 11yos have such accidents, I would still have felt far more confident about my very sensible 8yo than about some of dd's 11yo friends, had I been their mother. It is not just about whether 7yos in general are more likely; whatever decision you make is going to be about one child in particular.

Cory, I have already said that these figures are not ideal but they are the only ones I can come up with. If you can point me in the direction of something more specific wrt, say, 7 year olds vs 11 year olds, then I would happily reconsider my opinion. The point is that almost all parents will feel that it is ok in the case of their particular child as they are so mature and capable.

I have already said that, probably, the greater risk is to children at the lower end of the 5 - 14 age group, but 7 is perilously close to that end and 11 is not. I wouldn't take the risk with a younger child, you would. I suppose the real difference is, I wouldn't be able to live with myself if I had left an under 14 alone and something serious had happened to them, presumably you could?

vmcd28

the point is that there is currently no emergency contact in this case

And you know this how? For all anyone here knows, these people may have perfectly adequate arrangements for their child to call on someone in an emergency. I doubt the OP is their only neighbour.

It sounds most likely that the child is still asleep in bed while the mother is out, and that is why he doesn't go with them. So if they want him to get another half hour's rest, then there's no point in getting him up to go to a neighbour. Might as well take him with them in that case.

The RoSPA figures suggest to me that a child between 5 & 14 is more likely to receive hospital treatment, after bashing its head, than a young adult. More reported injuries, not necessarily more accidents or more danger, & no correlation with children being left alone to sustain these injuries.

I'd expect a lot of those to be climbing frame/trampoline/play equipment related & to occur under adult supervision.

If I left a 7 year old briefly, I'd expect to discuss safe behaviour with them: no climbing, keep away from garden pond, don't muck about with knives, matches or anything electrical.

Teenagers have different ways of putting themselves in danger when left unattended!

raven the RoSPA figures may well suggest that to you but they are the figures for children and adults who have been rendered concussed/unconscious by an accident in the home. If someone in your house was unconscious or clearly concussed are you saying you wouldn't seek medical help on their behalf? You'd only refer someone under the age of 15?

More barrel scraping I fear.

I quote figures from RoSPA and ask for any other relevant data anyone can find to counter these figures and I get anecdotal "evidence" and individual's opinions as to what the RoSPA data "says to them".

Although the NSPCC guidelines are not law, it is reasonable to assume that they have done their homework pretty well. Their recommendation that 13 is the age below which a child should not be left at home is, to my mind, a well thought out one. On that, and the RoSPA figures, I base my opinion that, whilst leaving a 12 or even 11 year old may be acceptable on certain occasions in the case of some unforeseen circumstance, to plan to leave a 7 yo on a regular basis is not the most responsible parenting.

It depends on when you are leaving them. Obviously if you go out to work and leave them it isn't responsible, but if you leave them in bed for 20mins in the morning when they could leap out of bed and be banging on the neighbour's door in less than 60 sec (and they have asked to be left and the neighbour knows) it is perfectly responsible.
Whether or not you leave a 7yr old, by secondary school the DC should be trusted to cope for 30 mins-unless they show they are not to be trusted. 13yrs is a bit old. If they are going into town by that age on public transport I'm sure they can manage 30 mins while mum pops to the local shop.