Am I really 'grossly irresponsible'?

[Saggingninja]

My 12 year old daughter's best friend - 'Polly' comes to stay for a few days over half-term. Polly is 14. On the first day, Polly says she would love to go into town (Manchester) with Katie. So I give them money, make sure their phones are charged and send them off.

Both girls are sitting in a cafe having hot chocolate. Polly texts her mum to say she's having fun. Three minutes later Polly's mother calls me. I am 'grossly irresponsible letting two young girls go into town and anything could happen.'

I pointed out that it's half-term, there are likely to be loads of parents and children around and both girls go to school by bus every day. But Polly's mother is convinced their are gangs of Mancunian paedophiles lurking everywhere, so I dash into town to rescue the girls from having a nice time.

I had very overprotective parents who convinced me there were 'bad people' everywhere and kept me in a bubble. I grew up anxious and timid and was determined that my own children would be more confident. And our sons are far more likely to be victims of criminal violence. Our girls are in far more (statistical) danger of being assaulted by someone they know well.

Perhaps I should have told Polly's mother before I let them go. But she (Polly) seemed so pleased and there were two of them. Was I wrong?

lol at 'roam the streets'.

Which for most of us probably means that our children walk to the bus stop, look at a few shops, go to a reasonably priced food and drink outlet (the £3 Meal Deal to be eaten watching the skateboarders is the current choice of my feral roaming stray and his friends) , perhaps go to the cinema, and back to someone's house equipped with bags of popcorn and doritos to watch horror films. Texting their parents en route to let them know where they are.

Surely this is normal from Yr 7 onwards?

I am sorry to hear that Manchester City Centre is unsafe during daylight hours, on a weekday afternoon, and hope the police get a handle on that very soon. Thankfully my DS accesses the tube at Brixton and we do not have to worry about this sort of thing,

'roaming the streets' is like 'farming your children out' (aka childcare with a trusted interviewed experienced professional, aka 'a stranger'.

"Fair enough as we were 7 (the 80s huh grin)2

ROFL

Yes, my do is in Camden tonight. Sure am glad he wasn't in Manchester this lunchtime................

At my children's school they offer level 2 btec for year 10 and 11s. This is taught at the local college which they have to travel to during school hours.The vast majority of these children will be 14 when they start. Would this mother restrict Polly's options, as she would have to travel to town alone by bus? (Manchester btw)

Haven't read the full thread but I suspect there is another issue at play here.

Polly's mum perhaps feels that OP usurped her parental authoritaw and is panicking at the thought of not knowing exactly where her DD is 24/7. Explains the OTT reaction.

My 12 year old gets on the train to school every day but regardless still isn't streetwise enough to cope in town on her own. This thread is making me realise I need to help her along with independence, I might start arranging some town meet-ups and cinema trips.

No you are not grossly irresponsible but maybe a text to Polly's mum in advance would have been a good idea. But then hindsight is a wonderful thing.

It's always hard to anticipate other's requirements, but revealing an under-age's name can be especially sensitive. My daughters are called Jennifer, Catherine and Emily, and I am confident that that knowledge won't help anyone find them or take advantage of them. But it is a very common fear, and I hope that, much too late, Mumsnet will remove that name from this thread

But being a parent is a scary thing, and one mother's care is another's abandonment. You know now that your friend is especially careful in a particular way, but you didn't know that before. It's fairest that both of you square your expectations, and apologise for not doing so before

Don't forget that, with a two-year difference, your friend may have been afraid of the situation of responsibility that you put her daughter into: caring for someone two years younger

But you will have helped everyone with your trust. Your friend and her daughter may have found that they were capable of more than they imagined, and your own daughter had a great day out and, at least some times, felt that she was her own person

Just, please, never name juveniles on the internet. You can do a "we'll call her Jane" if you must, to help you tell the story but, with the advent of the internet, very few parents are comfortable with their children's names being published.

You chose to omit the name of your own girl, but with the help of unthinking cheerleaders you have upset many of us.

Asking the entire world on mumsnet what they think comes with a responsibility, and YABVU in a different way from your expectations.

erchissick Fri 28-Oct-16 17:59:03

"You are not grossly irresponsible, but irresponsible in that you made a decision for someone else's child when that child's mother thought she would be in your permanent care. It's ok to make these kinds of decisions for your own child but not for someone else's child. Would it really have hurt to make a quick phone call to run it by her? After all, she might be the kind of parent who, like your parents, is not comfortable with letting their kids go it alone."

So when do you stop asking the parents and start communicating with the child themselves? Would you still be texting the parent about a 17yo? About a 16yo?

This is not a small child who cannot speak for herself: this is someone who is 4 years away from adulthood and 2 years away from the age of consent.

Borodin- I think Polly is almost certainly a fake name.

As ever, I love the idea that the entire city of Manchester is rough. (I like to imagine some posters have a comprehensive spreadsheet of rough/not rough places )

Don't forget that, with a two-year difference, your friend may have been afraid of the situation of responsibility that you put her daughter into: caring for someone two years younger

It might only be thirteen months difference, depending on when their birthdays fall.

I had friends who for a few months were fourteen when I was still twelve. It never occurred to any of us that they were in any way responsible for me when we went out. My mother certainly didn't think she was putting any of them in the position of 'caring for' me; she expected me to be capable of looking after myself.

Amazed , not for the first time , that someone would take the trouble to check their actions with total strangers on a social media site yet not talk to the parent of a child they were in locum parentis to .
When it comes to other people's children it is unwise to make assumptions ......

Please can somebody explain to me what harm could come to two teenagers in a city centre in broad daylight?

Why does anyone need to explain?

The issue is that this mother felt it was unsafe. It's irrelevant why she thought it was unsafe.

She's checking her actions because she's surprised at the mother's reaction. Clearly at the time she made the decision to allow them into town she didn't think it was anything out of the ordinary that merited another opinion!

No the issue is that she didn't let the OP know what she was and wasn't happy with. Over protective mother's need to pipe up. The OP presumably isn't a mind reader.

This is not a small child who cannot speak for herself: this is someone who is 4 years away from adulthood and 2 years away from the age of consent.

Agree. But as she is a minor then her parents take responsibility for her. In school we have to have consent to go on any trip outside of the school gates - even if it's down the road and back. And that is up to when they leave Year 13. Consent is an important aspect to caring for another person's child. Have whatever standards you feel are ok for your own child - don't assume those are the same for all children.

OP is not a mind reader but could have double checked with Polly's mum if she was relinquishing all supervision for the afternoon and was placing her child in an uncontrolled public area.

As I said, I think it's not a problem. But I'm not Polly's mum and therefore she should have checked.

Bertrand I haven't lived in Manchester for a few years and don't know how much it's changed. Certain bits of it were very rough. The problem I had was that the rough bits and the OK bits were cheek by jowl. Within the space of a couple of hundred yards you could wander from somewhere pretty safe to somewhere where yes, you could get mugged at knifepoint. When I lived there, as an adult in my early 20s, I was threatened whilst out and about during the day. I was also kerb-crawled (early evening but still early). Friends of mine were mugged in broad daylight. Someone tried to break into the flat below mine, again during the day.

From my experiences of the place, I would be a bit worried about someone in their early teens being there unsupervised unless they were very streetwise. Whereas I'd happily let any secondary age children wander around in say Cambridge or Bath.

Nobody has yet to come up with any convincing evidence why it is inappropriate for young teens to go to town unsupervised or why it is significantly more dangerous than 20/30 years ago.

I've just remember that when I was about 14 my 12 YO sister and I went to the coast, about an hour away with our 8 YO brother and no adults.

I'm not sure that was appropriate but we got there and back in one piece. I don't know what our parents were thinking. But then it was the 1980s and there were no terrorists or child snatchers around then, oh no.

Well hopefully some good can come from it. Polly (to whoever chastised the OP Polly is clearly not the girl's real name!) and her mum will have a conversation and Polly's mum will realise her daughter came to no harm on her hot chocolate jaunt to the badlands of inner city Manchester. 😂 She may even loosen the reins a bit.

Would have mentioned the plan to Polly's mum first - but see nothing wrong with 2 girls of that age shopping in Manchester unescorted. It's a great shopping area, quite compact and safe ( in as much as safety can be guaranteed anywhere - there are dangers just sitting 'safely' at home on the internet these days). Kids need to be taught how to stay safe and deal with mini crisis - or they really are 'at risk'.

For those saying you should have checked with Polly's Mum first (bonkers, in my view!) - at what age would you NOT feel she should check with Mum first?

15? (!!!)
16? (!!!!!!)
17? (!!!!!!!!)