To not want daughter going to a wood by herself?

[Vellia]

Dd is 16. We live in a town with lots of countryside/footpaths at close proximity. About a 15 minute walk away from our house, you get to the edge of some farmers’ fields. If you walk down the side of one of these you find yourself in a lovely small wood. At the moment the bluebells are out and it’s absolutely magical.

Over Easter, dd and I have gone for a walk in this wood most mornings before she starts revising (I work in a school so have school holidays off). But in a few weeks’ time she’ll be off school on pre-GCSE study leave while I’ll be working.

She’s said in passing that she’s going to go for a walk in the woods at the start of each day to get herself in the right frame of mind for revision.

I feel rather uncomfortable about this as the wood is a significant distance away from the road & any houses. Definitely out of ear-shot. And the wood is never very busy - we rarely bump into more than one or two people, mostly dog walkers; often it’s entirely empty apart from us.

AIBU to think it would be unwise for dd to go walking there by herself? Would I be unreasonable to tell her she can’t?

it was obviously sarcastic. Even without reading the second half of her post

I don't find sarcasm easy to read without italic inflection, unless it's spoken.

Mirri

This thread is absolutely batshit.

All of us everyday do things that are more likely to lead to us being injured, dying or being attacked that walking in a wood that not many people go to.

The places with most people, are the places you are most likely to be attacked for the rather obvious reason that there are more people there so it is more likely one of them is an attacker looking for someone to attack (even assuming we are only talking about stranger attacks and, as we all know, women are more likely to be attacked by someone they know) . And yes, a policewoman on a personal safety for women course pointed that out to me! Those woods are probably one of the safest places OPs daughter could go to in the entire UK.

I can only concur with a pp who said that people who spend their lives watching films and tv where women are attacked in the opening scenes of crime and horror movies have developed this erroneous belief that one of the most dangerous things a woman can do is walk in blue bell woods in the morning.....

This thread is absolutely batshit

Yep!

What realistically is likely to happen to you on any given day?

Sweet FA.

Sweet Fanny Adams. Although she didn't make it home, did she..

You are not unreasonable. You have common sense. How about making it an early morning walk together? What could be more beautiful and bonding.

Perhaps you could just walk with her to put this whole issue to bed. Would be a nice mother daughter bonding thing and it would mean this debate could finally end lol

At 16, I used to walk alone in woods and fields. I'm now 20, so I'm not talking years and years ago... the walls used to clear my head and I enjoyed them YABU, I would let her - she is 16, so if she really wants to, she'll go anyway...

*walks

I recommend you read "The Happiest Kids in the World: How Dutch Parents Help Their Kids (and Themselves) by Doing Less" by Rina Mae Acosta and Michele Hutchison. It tackles exactly this issue and makes some great arguments to get you thinking about projecting your own fears onto your children.

I’m now imagining the ‘its too risky’ posters saying ‘A WOOD???’ like Lady Bracknell saying ‘A HANDBAG???’

I reckon there are quite a few posters who would feel at home I Saudi - can't let women out without a man to protect them. I'm glad my parents weren't like that.

It's a wood not the Hood, don't worry so much. Nothing better than walking alone in the woods in peace and quiet, it restores the soul. Think I might go for a walk myself today, it's been too long.

You have common sense. How about making it an early morning walk together? What could be more beautiful and bonding.

What could be more beautiful? Going by herself. Maybe she doesn't want to have a bonding moment just because her mum is overprotective. Many people were moving out of home at 16/17 on a previous thread, yet parents here won't let a 16 year old go for a walk in the woods?

Genuinely bewildered by this entire thread.

. Maybe she doesn't want to have a bonding moment just because her mum is overprotective

I can imagine the response if my nearly 16 year old said they wanted to go for a walk by themselves and I said "you're not to go out by yourself, but we can go together as a bonding experience."
I'd probably get told to bog off lol

Wow
This thread is an eye-opener into the limited worlds of those with limited understanding

It doesn't mean you have limited understanding if you don't curtail your own movement as you're scared bogeymen on every corner or behind every tree is just waiting to jump out at you.

I'm surprised how nasty some of the comments about the more protective posters are. Fair enough if you think it's being overprotective, you're welcome to say that, but the comments saying that it's because of watching too much TV, being irrational and too stupid to understand statistics are just plain rude.

Same could be said about those who says you're of limited understanding intelligence if you don't fear walking out alone.

I'm happy to admit that I am more worried than some about their daughter being alone in a secluded spot. But that isn't because I watch too much TV. It's because I vividly remember a man telling me he had a knife and making me hold his penis. Then me having to tell that story to the police, as a very shy young teenager, and thinking that they didn't believe me.
Midsomer Murders, yes, hilarious.

We are all irrational and poor at understanding probability and assessing risk Ravenmum. That is a natural part of the human condition. The challenge we all face is to confront our innate irrationality and educate ourselves into being better able to make sensible choices.

That's not rude, it's factual. If you mistake robust discussion, challenging other people to think wider and deeper than they previously had done, for rudeness (in some cases at least) that is just your misunderstanding.

What would be the point of a 'discussion' where everyone agrees with each other, nobody challenges anyone, introduces new facts or ideas - and nobody learns anything?

Lottie, I'm not stupid. I do understand probability. I am aware that my nervousness in secluded places is because of my experiences as a child, not because of probability. That's my precise point. I can't make myself less uncomfortable when walking through the woods by thinking about probability, because I remember the police asking me to describe what the man's penis felt like. Do you see what I'm saying?

By "rude" I mean people ignoring the true reasons I am giving for my nervousness, and repeatedly saying that it is because I watch too much TV. Ignoring the points that people make and sticking to your own prejudices is rude.

It isn't statistically safe for women to walk any where but I would never let that fact limit my life, and don't think you should be asking your daughter to do so either.

What a bonkers thread full of bonkers people.