To not want DD to have play-dates or attend parties in certain areas due to safety concerns?

[HourOrTwo]

She is 7. Until now she only has playdates with friends whose parents we know well, but now she has a bigger group of friends. Some of these friends live on local council estates. One of these estates has a particularly bad reputation (drug problems, unemployment, high crime rate). When I drove through it recently I noticed kids playing out in street, groups of youths standing around smoking and drinking, big dogs in studded collars roaming around (no muzzles), rubbish everywhere etc. I don't mean to sound judgemental but it's not the sort of place we want DD playing or walking around.

We're happy for DD's friends to come play at ours, and we want her to socialise with children from social different backgrounds... but recently she's been invited on several play-dates on these estates plus a party. So far I've made excuses, as I don't want her playing out unsupervised and TBH don't like her going to houses unless I know the parents and trust them to keep a close eye on her. Even if I chatted to these mums at school gates and they promise to supervise, I don't want her going to houses where anyone is smoking, drinking or teenage siblings are coming in and out with their mates, or any household with a dangerous dog (there are a lot of pitbulls and rottweilers on the estate), but I can't really ask this.

How do we politely decline these play-dates without offending anyone? Is there a way we can have DD's friends at our house without her going to their houses? And what do I tell DD, without mentioning it's because of the area her friends live?

CookPass yes exactly, that is what I was trying to say! I wouldn't let my DC go up to any strange dog, but wouldn't dream of writing something off as aggressive just because of the breed it is and where the owner lives.

I suspect the OP is terrified her daughter will be assaulted by some random teenage boy in the same way as she was. OP have you ever sought any kind of professional help to explore this experience?
As for the narrow minded stuff about council estates rich demonstrates she's not alone in her narrow minded and unpleasant views. Mind you I've seen enough of rich and his posts to suspect that he's about a hundred times more insufferable in his general attitude than the OP will ever be. He's probably best ignored if he is so insecure that he has to tout for attention here.

Ive never seen staffie types on my estate, or dogs roaming free. The most popular breed where I live are Labrador's.
I have 7 year old twins and they don't play out the front unsupervised, as I live on a fairly busy road. When the girls friends come to play, they are in the house or garden, I have never left children unsupervised, or in the care of teenagers. My eldest two dc's are in their twenties and have left home.
It is the assumption by op that parents on council estates will do the above, without establishing the facts. It is the blatant stereotyping.

I can't tell a staffie from a pitbull, but living in an estate with young men in hoodies with these dogs on chains dragging them along, kicking them, roaring at them and letting them free, I don't imagine that really matters. I routinely saw dogs being mistreated and had to report them. I wouldn't let my kids out on our green in our estate because there were two dogs within four doors range who were undisciplined and let to run without harnesses all over the place. These dogs really acted as a HUGE motivation for us to finally move out of that area, and I know we were lucky to be able to do that (though it did take a lot of sacrifice!).

I just think it's a bit naïve this MN insistence that there's no such thing as a place where it might be riskier for children to be. You'd swear people were queuing up to live in poverty on estates with poor reputations for orderliness and low criminality if you read your average MN thread on it. It's really not always that fun to live somewhere where there's a lot of antisocial behaviour, and if you do have groups of hooded youth with weapon dogs who are engaging in antisocial behaviour in your area, you will know this. Even if individual they're all lovely. I used to work on a youth offending team. Most of the kids were genuinely really nice kids, just struggling with living in poverty and being expected to live up to macho ideals of what it is to become a man in a poor place. But no, it wasn't all just lovely tea and cakes either.

And one of the reasons we moved was because I would actually fully understand why someone wouldn't want to send their child on a playdate to ours based on what the estate looked like and what they could see around them. We were miserable our kids were stuck there so long, I actually had quite significant depression after our second son was born because we were stuck there. It's a bit much to expect people to see things that make them feel uncomfortable and unsafe and just ignore those instincts because most people are "lovely". We were lovely too, but how is someone supposed to know that about you when all they hear about and see on an estate is negative? People are only human and can only go on what evidence they have. It's really, really foolhardly to ignore the evidence of what you can see and what you're told because you're afraid people will call you a snob - even if your fears are unjustified. You find out more about the situation or you choose to avoid it if there are other options. It seems just like the obvious response rather than some terrible moral trait.

My DSC know not to approach strange dogs, regardless of breed or neighbourhood. BUT there are certain dogs that worry me more than others, mainly big muscular dogs that are off-lead. And TBH when I see pitbulls in studded harnesses being walked by young men in hoodies, I do wonder whether they are fighting-dogs/ weapon-dogs. Yes it's a stereotype but I've seen enough documentaries about illegal dog-fighting rings to know there is fact behind this stereotype. Sadly most dog-fighting rings operate from council estates.

My son is absolutely bloody terrified of dogs and wouldn't approach one if you paid him all the Pokémon in China, but the reason for that was that these two dogs on our estate were a) massive; b) aggressive and c) very often off the leash and bounding about like absolutely monster dogs. One in particular, to be fair. That house was also always being raided, and I was very scared of the people who lived there. That house and the one with the other dog accounted for maybe 2-3% of the occupants of the whole estate, most of whom were young families like ours or elderly people but that 2-3% made all the difference.

Since we moved we've had to do an awful lot of work on getting him to tolerate being in public spaces because of his fear of dogs.

duplodon what brilliant posts. So glad you got to move somewhere you were happy.

Sorry, cross-posted.

Doplodon, great posts, I totally agree with you. At last somebody is talking sense instead of calling OP a snob and claiming council estates are as safe as anywhere else.

Caspian oh I do apologise, I didn't realise you'd watched documentaries about it. So sorry. Had no idea you were now the expert on dog behaviour.

RE: all the other stuff, can dress it up all you want but it is snobby and it is stereotyping.

HourOrTwo it's obvious you really care about your daughter and that is lovely.

Would love to introduce the OP to an ex neighbour of mine, he was rich, charming, two gorgeous children in private school. Lovely to neighbours etc

Trouble is all his money came from drug dealing, eventually he pissed off the wrong person and was shot dead.

Still, at least he wasn't on a council estate eh?

I think the OP is being stereotyped as snob and has clearly indicated she is not because she would like her child to mix with all kinds of kids and she would like to get to know the other mums too!

Italian actually I wouldn't say that comes across at all, wrapping your children in thick cotton wool is IMO a form of neglect. I mean the fact that the OP says her precious DD can't be around TEENAGERS, FFS? Surely that is not normal or healthy??

We can agree to disagree re: council estates and dogs, but surely no sane person would think the OP wanting her DD to not be around teenagers is anything more than extreme neurosis?

my council estate is perfectly safe. I don't see how people can claim that it's council so obviously not as safe as our naice MC neighbourhood.
stereotyping much?

ER she is not being 'stereotyped' as a snob. Being stereotyped as a snob would be assuming someone was a snob just because they were well off or lived in a nice house. We are saying the OP is a snob based on her opinions, which ARE snobby. She hasn't had any personal experience of any of the so-called issues on this 'council estate' at all, is making wild assumptions based on the fact she once drove through it, thinks it is rude for teenagers to be in the same house as her DD and is overall expressing the opinions of a classist, narrow-minded snob.

....but she also mention "mums from the estate" in a more derogatory way than she referred to "mums from the village". THAT is what people have objected to.
Am sure she is a good parent who wants her child to mix.....but also mentions that "the mums from the estate" didn't bother asking her about their children being safe in the way that "mums from the village" would do. That IS lazy sterotyping and snobby.

quite frankly I'd rather mix with 'mums from the estate' with the way OP has made herself sound. That is to say, a nightmare who would turn up at my door for a playdate with a long list of things her precious DC would/would not eat, instructions for making sure DC was tethered safely inside and watched like a hawk at all times lest they come into contact with a gasp DOG, demands that my teenager and their friends should not be in the house....etc etc

I mean Jesus Christ, whatever happened to just letting kids do their own thing? My lot are quite happy to just get on with it and play. They don't give a stuff if there is a dog or a teenager in the house, or if they get a bit of broccoli in their pasta. If that makes me a bad mother, better call social services!

Parsnip, don't you think it's stereotyping to say OP is 'wrapping daughter in cotton wool' when you don't know that she does? She expressed concerns, she didn't say her daughter is not allowed out or not allowed to mix with any teenagers at all. The fact she encourages her to mix with different children and go on regular play dates suggests she is trying to give her an open-minded upbringing.

About the teenagers... I know it seems odd to think teenagers might harm a 7-year-old, but OP explained she was sexually assaulted by a friend's teenage brother as a child. So I can see where she's coming from. All mums want to protect their kids. I'm sure if you'd had that experience you'd want to make sure it never happened to your DD.
She also didn't say all teenagers, she specifically said big groups of teenage boys. I suspect a lot of parents wouldn't want their 7-year-old playing with big groups of teenage boys, or hanging around teenagers who are drinking and smoking.

Also remember that what is normal in your household may be alien to others. Not everyone has teenagers in and out every day. My friends with teenagers don't have the 'open-door policy' people on here are saying is the norm everywhere, their teenagers have to agree in advance when they want to have friends round.

I think she sounds really anxious more than anything. I can identify with that, though I don't share her specific concerns.

The comments about the teenage boys are absolutely coming out of a personal experience that has marked her. Psychology tells us that if you or someone you know has an experience that's relatively uncommon, the way we process information will mean that you continue to be very anxious about it regardless of what rational information you are supplied with on the risks to yourself. That anxiety is there now, and will be there, though responding to it as if it is a real threat will actually reduce anxious feelings in the short-term and increase them over the long-term.

If you've had a negative experience with a teenage boy, then everyone in that category becomes a perceived risk. It's just human nature, not snobbery as such.

We don't like what we don't understand, it tends to scare us. I think all humans have a tendency to do this. I don't hear a sense that OP thinks she is "better" than people living a different life to her, which is what would define snobbery for me. I get the sense she's scared that there is increased risk because of the information she gets from the world around her about council estates. The media does fuel a lot of this, so if she doesn't have personal experience and then there are outward signs of things that scare her, she's going to have these thoughts - it's just inevitable. I wouldn't vent my ire at her half as much as at TV3 reality TV and the Daily Mail.

parsnipbob were you referring to my comment about the OP caring about her dd? We can certainly agree to disagree.

I have not waded through all 21 pages, and if the OP has thta is quite a monumental task on behalf of her Dd (to me!)

So you can correct me if I am wrong but I don't think the OP said she didn't want her dd to be around all teenagers. The impression I got from the bits I have read is that she did not want lots of teenage siblings of her friends on play dates around her dd or her dd left alone with them while the mum goes out.

I am fairly sure the OP is not talking about all teenagers or all teenagers she knows.

HourOrTwo please correct me if wrong.

Personally, I don't think worrying about where a 7 year old is or who is looking after them is wrapping in cotton wool.

I just sense lots of getting frustrated about something that is not really meant in that way. The OP is asking for advice. There has been some very excellent advice here, so that is good. And yes we can agree to disagree.

'she also mention "mums from the estate" in a more derogatory way than she referred to "mums from the village'

I didn't read it that way. She described an experience, I don't think there was anything derogatory about it.

duplodon you do actually realise that some people live on council estates because that is where their family have always lived and because the rent is cheaper than private, not because they wallow in poverty with status dogs and antisocial teens. I find your posts insulting tbh

'some people live on council estates because that is where their family have always lived and because the rent is cheaper than private'

Sure, but that doesn't mean all council estates are safe, pleasant places to live. It doesn't mean there are no problems with antisocial behaviour, weapon-dogs, crime and drugs. I'm sure some council estates are lovely and do not have any problems. Others are notorious for problems with drugs, violent crime etc. Whether or not you live there by choice is irrelevant to whether or not it's safe for children to play-out. I agree you shouldn't tar all estates with the same brush, but it's worth researching statistics and talking to people who actually live there, rather than assuming it is safe. Same goes for any area, not just estates.

Ffs people, the OPs dd has been invited to a play date and a party. She will be there for maybe a couple of hours on each occasion.
Is this level of worry and paranoia really reasonable when you put it into perspective?

If the parents have gone to the effort of organising a childrens party you can assume they'll make the effort to pick up the tab ends and the used needles from the living room and put a muzzle on the fighting dogs, surely?