Neglect or just crap parenting?

[selly24]

Leaving a child age 5 alone in house while running an errand taking 15 mins.
A friend seems to do this a lot. Not witnessed directly but from what parent had said eg ' DC woke up and I was on errand so was upset with me' and from what child refers to or assumes.
Eg when babysitting -' oh, why do I need to come when you go do X? Parent always leaves me here.
Was mortified when first heard bu thought prob a one off, as parent's OH was away, but seems to be a regular thing...am increasingly concerned. Should I be.?

What is the opposite of over-anxious? I think that's where I sit.

MaQueen - of course not, I'd rather have been at home. However, I can't be on hand all the time and the likelihood of it happening is tiny. I'm not saying there is no risk just that the risk is negligible. Anything can happen at any point whether I am there or not. If I leave her at home at 16 and she falls down the stairs, I would also rather be at home - if you follow the argument to it's conclusion you would never leave a child of any age at home alone just in case.

The point at which I decided that it was safe for me not to be at home for fifteen minutes was a judgement call, one I made and have no cause to regret.

could I just say to those who are scoffing at the level of risk that SS would regard this as neglect.

I left my two 10/11 year old at home alone while I went to buy a car (in fact another mum was supposed to come round but she didnt show), while I was away someone phoned for me, and when that someone realised the children were home alone, she notified SS, who took it quite seriously, and wrote me a very stiff letter, enclosing a leaflet on neglect.

to those who are suggesting that there is some kind of cut off age, there is not. If you leave your, say, 15 year old at home, and something happens, you will be held responsible.

As for the OP, leaving a 5 year old home alone is simply not acceptable.

But why wouldn't you just take your kid to the shop with you? Quite a nice experience really.

ob she said 'her foot would still be broken when I got back.......it's unlikely to be life threatening' which sounds horribly cavalier to me.

It also sounds like enb doesn't think it makes much difference if her child is on their own, with a broken foot, in considerable pain for, say, 15 minutes....or her being immediately on hand to give comfort, support, take charge.

I mean, it's only 15 minutes that the 5 year old was in pain and very distressed, and alone...it's character building, no doubt

Trifle, eggs is a good one because it happened today.

Was thinking about dinner, realised I needed eggs, house down the lane sells them (about 150m). DD in the middle of her marble game, no socks or shoes on and it was raining so she'd need coat, umbrella.

I was dressed and slipped wellies on. DD i'm going to grab some eggs do you want to come? No mummy i'm playing. OK i'll be 5 minutes, i'll lock the door behind me. Ok bye mummy.

Came back and she hadn't moved. Its not laziness at all. Its a judgement call.

And no before anyone says it, I don't think she could have suddenly decided to stick a marble in her mouth for no reason at all.

enb actually you can and should 'be on hand' all the bleddy time when you are responsible for a 5 year old.

You should be within ear shot.

She needed a coat and shoes as you did. So you get her dressed job done. You'd do it if she was 3.

Or you don't buy eggs. Make something else for dinner

I'd have just stuck her in waterproofs and made the egg trip fun for her.

A bit older and I'd leave them but not at 5.

Apart from anything life at that age is about being out and about with a parent showing them the world.

Blimey - when DS is 11 he's going to be coming home to an empty home after secondary school.

I'd ignore a letter from SS at that age.

Actually, yes it is laziness. And I could never see it as anything else.

And I imagine this will go down like a ton of bricks but when I compare my children with other peoples they are markedly more independent than a lot of other children.

They are happy to take public transport from about 10/11 on their own. They walk to the shops on their own. Are capable of talking to adults, buy shopping, answer phones, use ATMs, sign for parcels etc all a lot younger than other children do. I'm not saying that is because they have been left on their own younger than most children, but it is symptomatic of how children are generally closeted these days and not allowed to grow up until their teens/late teens.

Oblomov I'm with you. Startlingly, people in real life have complimented me on my parenting style. I don't know, I was brought up in a different country where I was out of doors from breakfast til supper, hunting snakes, making cow pat fires and getting chased by savage geese. There's no way that I can offer that to my child in this country but the parenting anxiety in this country makes me sad.

I agree, it is laziness. It doesn't take long to get a child ready to go out with you.

Its only laziness if you are some kind of martyr to the mummy life. Oh darling what fun walking down the lane you've walked down a million times in your life.

Marble run is more fun than a wet walk in the rain to buy eggs that she's done a thousand times before. Believe me.

And I imagine this will go down like a ton of bricks but when I compare my children with other peoples they are markedly more independent than a lot of other children

How is anyone fostering independence by leaving their child at home while the adult goes out and runs errands. Better to take the child with you and let them take charge e.g. Buy the stuff in the shop etc etc.

The more I read, the more it makes me think that people leave their kids because it is easier than having to get their children to do something which they might find boring, e.g. Popping to the shops.

It's not up to her though, Press. It's up to you. All you needed to do was shoes, socks, coat. Who cares what she was doing?

I know it's a judgement call but - in my view - it's the wrong one to leave her alone just because you CBA putting her clothes on her.

You can all keep saying its laziness as much as you want. Its isn't.

If she was hardly ever taken out then fair enough. You are overblowing the situation. She didn't want to go. I didn't want or need to take her. She's learnt the world doesn't come crashing down around her ears if mummy is out of sight for two minutes. And more than likely won't grow up thinking something terrible is going to happen at any given moment.

MaQueen, what you're saying is foolish and a little obtuse. Of course it make a difference whether one is there or not. I would also prefer to be there if she hurt herself at school but I'm not going to hang about her classroom just in case. However, it's unlikely to happen at all.

Ah the shop learning theory. She's spent years trailing around the shops playing the help mummy game. At what age is it ok for that to stop being fun for them?

CBA, laziness. Call it what you want, we have a difference of opinion. There was no need for her to come. No need at all.

Not read the whole thread, but am fairly relaxed about my sensible 7 and 9 year old being left alone for up to 10/15 mins. Not when they where 5 mind.
From 7, and with clear instructions (don't open the door, don't make a cup of tea...) , I let them stay home when I need to drop the other one off at local activities. I make sure I have my phone with me, and they know how to call me if necessary. I always give them the option to come, and they will only stay home when tired and watching tv - otherwise they rather come along.

I have a Dutch friend, where things are very different - it's common to leave children home alone from a young age, without anyone bashing an eyelid. Her 2 dcs where home alone every day after school for an hour when they where 10/11, as she only finished work then. School knew about it and all was fine. (This was in Holland, not here!)

Believeitornot, its fostering independence in small increments. One day you leave them for 2 minutes. You come back and they haven't started a fire or tried to leave the house or cook a roast dinner. You know you can trust them, they know the rules. They know they are trusted.

Do you know how many children I know who are terrified of their own shadows? of the boogie man around the corner? teenagers who can't catch a bus or wait at home for a parcel because they've never been allowed to. We're raising our children in a culture of fear, even within their own homes. Something terrible might happen, something terrible might happen..except odds are it probably, more than likely..wont.

Who cares whether she wanted to go or not? She was five. You are the parent. Fair enough to say it isn't a substantial risk (it isn't negligible either but that's a different debate) but whether or not she wanted to go is neither here nor there. You are responsible for her.

Press: I am far from being in favour of a culture of fear. By all means, foster independence and show trust by leaving the room incrementally and giving your kids more freedom. But leaving a 5 year old alone for 15 minutes whilst you are out of contact isn't about fostering independence: it is negligent.

Well thats where we differ.

I prefer to let them move at their own pace. She was given an option and she was happy to be left. She wasn't kicking and screaming and refusing to go to school.