To think a 7yo is too young to go out unsupervised? Please help!

[QueenMas]

Please help, I feel sick.

I have just found out that when DD is at her Dad's, he allows her to go to the park on her own with her friends. She only turned 7 a couple of weeks ago, going into year 3 in Sept.

Her father lives semi rurally, on an estate in a quiet village. There isn't much around apart from fields and a couple of shops. I live in Greater London, so a big difference.

I wasn't entirely comfortable with him allowing her to "play out"; although come to terms with it as the children play on the green directly outside their houses (which are in a semi circle), and they have floor to ceiling windows at the front of the house so can be watched at all times.

But now, I find out that she goes to the park without him. It's only around the corner, however it means crossing a road and of course she is completely out of sight while there. AIBU to think this is inappropriate for a (just turned!) 7yo?

I have tried to speak to him about it, he does not see the problem. He hates me so much, he takes anything I say as "causing trouble" rather than thinking of our DD's safety! He eventually "agreed" not to let her go, but I don't trust that for a second, he lies constantly. He is spiteful and would tell DD not to tell me. Only last week, I had to take DD to A&E after she fell off her bike, I thought she had broken something. I called and called, and text to tell him. He did not reply. Who doesn't reply when their child is being taken to hospital?! But he was annoyed with me so didn't care.

I've sent him a video to try and show him my concerns
although I doubt he will watch. As well as stranger danger, I worry about her crossing the road. About not being "briefed" correctly about what to do in an emergency. I feel that she is FAR too young to be out and about unsupervised, she was only 6 a couple of weeks ago fgs!

What can I do? Other than stopping contact, but is that reasonable? I feel this is neglecting my daughter

There's a huge middle ground between lax parenting and control freakery though, to be fair.

Ego, women are abusers too and that's so off topic.

It depends where he lives. I wouldn't let my 7 year old out alone here, but its really busy and not that safe. But I have let her go out alone in quieter places, although she takes a mobile with her and doesn't go that far. So not sure if yabu or not!

I would have thought most kids who are ruled with a fist of iron and not allowed to the shops alone, until they're 13 years old would move out at 16. Even if that meant sofa surfing at their mate's houses.

That was me. Although I moved into a tent, age 16.

Starbrite, I live in Scotland. DD will definitely be 11 when she starts secondary school. The oldest children in her class will be 12.

My 9yo isn't allowed to go to the park on her own yet (at the end of the road) but thats because I don't trust some of the other kids round here that are allowed to go to the park on their own!

I was at the park when I saw two 9-10yo boys having a punch up, no parental supervision at all and I felt really unsure about intervening (I did shout 'Oi' at them and checked on the boy who came off worse) this confirmed to me that I didn't want dd there on her own.

Op I understand your concerns but am not sure that you can do anything other than voice your concerns.

The biggest risk to a child is probably its parents

Indeed this thread has certainly shown how many parents are willing to let dc go out un supervised at such a young age"

Wow. Just wow.

Ruled with a fist of iron Worra??!! Because you decide, as a caring parent that letting your child out to wander the streets alone isn't a great idea?! Seriously?! There's no iron gloves in our house- just gentle, protective ones parenting their children carefully.
You know, I was never allowed out to "roam". Never. I was allowed to bike over to friends houses from about 12 ish and walked to school with friends from 11. At primary I never once went to the park alone. I left home at 18 to go to Uni hundreds of miles away from home and never returned to live in the area I came from. I had all the confidence I needed, despite what many of you clearly would consider a very overly protective childhood.

Starbrite etc, don't pretend your ridiculous level of over protection is better parenting. It's not. My dd has never yet needed rescuing by some helicopter parent. But I've 'rescued' the teenage kids of helicopter parents when they've eventually been allowed a scrap of freedom and they come unstuck because they haven't got the ability to deal with it. Because their parents have made them immature. But if you can't be bothered teaching your child basic life skills that's your choice.
Nor does it mean parents who allow independence suited to maturity don't spend time with their kids. I take my dd further afield than she can roam, because local stuff she can do herself, anytime. So we get more quality time and dd gets more playing out time.
I'd also say that by y6 none of the free range kids were chubby.
You want to inflict your illogical paranoia on your child, that's fine but don't try implying your neurosis makes you a superior or more caring parent. It just makes you appear to be desperately trying to justify your irresponsible parenting choices.

I'm pleased for you Singsongsung

However, I stand by what I said.

Any adult who wouldn't let a child nip to their local shop until they're 13 years old, is ruling with a fist of iron.

It's an abuse of parental power unless there is a specific reason why the child shouldn't do something that simple, before that age.

Raising children is about slowly building up their confidence, independence and ability to risk assess situations.

It's not about curtailing the freedom to pop out and buy a bag of crisps until they're a teenager.

That is all about the parent and not about the child at all.

Lurker. Re read your own post you think you're the only one who thinks they are superior.

No starbrite, you want to make veiled insults about other parents not caring as much as you, then expect it right back.
My parenting isn't superior, it's normal.

People want to let their kids out and not know where they are well its sad but their choice.

To be fair, that ^^ reads exactly like you think your parenting is superior to others.

It's not of course - it's just different.

I'm sorry but supervising a child who has just turned 7 at a park is not helicopter parenting!!

"I'm sorry but supervising a child who has just turned 7 at a park is not helicopter parenting!!"

It may or may not be. But walking an 11 year old to school and no letting a 12 year old pop to the shops is.

To be fair to Singsong, I think she's talking about the OP.

Whereas we're talking about the over controlling of a 12/13yr old, not being allowed to nip over the local shop, without an adult.

I am indeed Worra. I think it's important not to jump from 7 to 11/12 in the discussion as there's a massive difference in maturity.

I linked to this article on another thread, but there is a lot of stuff like this out there - psychologists who are genuinely concerned about the lack of children's freedom and its impact on children's mental health and ability to cope in the world.

It makes an interesting read...

aeon.co/magazine/culture/children-today-are-suffering-a-severe-deficit-of-play/

Whether parents let their children out to play at a younger age, or an older one will depend upon the child and where they live.

However, I do think it wrong to simply dismiss any parents who let their 'younger' children play out as lazy parenting. I think it's quite an ignorant attitude. I know my independence is something I hugely valued, and want for my children. At 16/17, I was jumping on trains going shopping at Oxford Street (I live SW England) or getting myself to my university interviews and open days (my parents literally took me to one!) and I want my children to have that same confidence and freedom.

Whilst my methods are certainly not the only method, and people might approach it differently, I certainly wouldn't call it lazy. For example, from a young age, I used to get my daughters to tell me when it was safe to cross the road. Lazy parenting would have just crossed the road, but I wanted my children to be safe so from 3/4 they made the decisions about when to cross (and I intervened when they made poor decisions...) before they were allowed out to play, I took them around the estate to discuss 'safe houses' or places they could go if someone approached them and they were concerned. We also role played different situations to discuss stranger danger and have talked at length about common dangers. I remember talking to my daughter (now 11) about Madeleine McCann when she went missing. It would be much easier just to let my daughters play in the garden, but I don't think I would have done them any favours. Now you might disagree with my methods, but I don't think you can dismiss it as lazy, as times, it certainly hasn't been the easy option.

A deficit of play? Because at 7 their parents take them to the park rather than letting them go alone? I could probably find you a number of studies referring to a deficit of parental input and involvement.
Children only suffer a deficit of play if they don't play enough! Playing at a park while an adult sits on a bench nearby will not have a negative impact on a 7 year old!!! In fact, if anything, in my opinion a 7 year old is likely to play more freely if the responsibility of self care is taken away.

Here you go-
www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CAsQFjAAahUKEwikq4zIyqXHAhXJfxoKHaodCVc&url=www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9624696/Parents-lack-time-for-their-children-study-suggests.html&ei=dk3MVaSYNcn_aaq7pLgF&usg=AFQjCNGtNXl5ELLbGnSWGTkBoBVAB8e9Og

That was my first attempt at a link on MN! It didn't really work did it!!! Still, you can google..