To let my 9 yr old go to the library alone?

[Rotanicani]

Realised we’d forgotten to return a library book, Ds offered to pop over.

The library is a few min from the house, if it wasn’t for buildings and trees I’d be able to see if from the door. The path there isn’t even on a road but across a patch of green. Ds is 9, particularly confident and has his head screwed on. The green is reasonably busy with footfall due to buses and a station being there as well as being a route to shops. He often pops to the corner shop in the day, they know him and are friendly and will walk to very local friends. It’s a city so hardly quiet.

In my world it’s quite normal at 9 providing the child is streetwise enough? No Sn

I’ve had a phonecall from the library, didn’t recognise the voice- we know most of them, having got the house number from his card. She felt she has to ring me as a safeguarding risk, that he was alone and then he’d also walked off. Ds reports she asked him to stay with her while she rung but he said ‘sorry I haven’t got a phone and my mum will worry if I’m late back. Not being rude but I don’t know you either so I don’t want to stay with you’. He said he then left her quickly, she wasn’t on the desk but walking in the library. His view was he wasn’t staying with some random woman. Said he want scared of her, and there were other people to go to if he had been, but he just didn’t want to stay with a stranger just in case. I presume she was in uniform but he said he didn’t really look. The only mitigating thing I can think of is maybe he looks 8? But he acts 9 or older. Knowing him he probably had a dismissive tone, but wouldn’t ever be rude in words or raise his voice. Just not focused fully on someone

@Chouetted

Of course that would have been sufficient and I agree it would have been better expressed that way. Yes, the librarian was a little over-zealous. But not a nut job, weird, a busy body, a silly woman, or any of the other insults people have thrown about on this thread.

Compare and contrast this thread with the one over the weekend about the teacher who wrote a child's name on its bookbag. MN is a strange place at times.

My 9yr old sounds a bit like yours - mature, responsible and well able to handle most situations. Mine has asked to be left at home sometimes rather than having to come out to collect younger siblings etc. I have agreed after remembering that at her age I was getting the public bus to and from school independently!!

It's so odd that in the last few decades we've gone from me doing that and it not being in anyway exceptional and definitely not something my parents agonised over (even despite the lack of telephones and ability to have a clue where I was) to today, where children are meant to be supervised at all times, everywhere?!

I agree with a PPin that we do our kids no favours. These children are meant to develop the skills needed to manage independent organisation in time for secondary school without being given the slighest lead-in at primary age. It's bonkers.

If being in a public space is genuinely a "safeguarding risk", what hope does any child have of ever finding a space where they can be safe?

I think you've misunderstood this. The perceived 'safeguarding risk' is not where the child was in this case, but the fact that he arrived there unaccompanied. If this is not a commonplace occurrence (for this 9yo or for 9yo's in general) then it could signal a safeguarding issue (such as escaping from bullies or a difficult home life).

@dontmakemeshushyou That can't be it, because if it was, why on earth would she have rung his mother, who might be the very person he was escaping from?

I think the rule about unaccompanied children must be over a certain age is to stop people from using the library as a free crèche while they go shopping.

@Chouetted

What do you mean "That can't be it"? You said "If being in a public space is genuinely a "safeguarding risk", what hope does any child have of ever finding a space where they can be safe?" I explained that being in a public space is NOT a safeguarding risk but being there alone when that is not a commonplace occurrence may be indicative of a safeguarding issue (such as the ones you identified like escaping bullies of a difficult home life).

Why do you think this explanation is wrong?

@dontmakemeshushyou if she rang his mother, she doesn't have any concerns about his mother. Therefore her concerns can't possibly be that he is at risk from something external to the library, or his mother would be a possibility. I would expect her to contact whoever she is supposed to report such concerns to in that case - probably some sort of safeguarding officer.

That leaves the safeguarding risk (and we are explicitly told it is a safeguarding risk) to be his location IN the library.

@Barkandcheese but it's not treating it as a a creche because the parent is not expecting anyone to look after their child. They are expecting the child to look after themselves in a place where there are books to entertain them. If they were messing around I would expect them to be told off or thrown out. I send my book worm kids (aged 9,11 and 13) in the library to wait for me all the time as I know they won't be bored and are unlikely to need any assistance or come to any harm.

I think Barkandcheese meant the CF who would leave their toddler unattended rather than, say, a preteen.

That’s exactly what I meant. My DD has been going to the library by herself while I run errands in town since she was ten for exactly the reasons bobonours stated. However it’s not beyond the bounds of possibility to imagine a CF type dumping much younger child(ren) off there assuming the staff will keep an eye on them.

Btw, I’m not accusing the OP of doing that, just pointing out a possible reason for the rule.

YANBU and your son sounds a sensible lad

I'd absolutely have let my 9yo do it but I now work with troubled teens and have become aware that libraries are a prime recruiting ground for gangs because children with unhappy home lives use them as a "safe" space, so perhaps she had genuine reason to be concerned.

@Chouetted
if she rang his mother, she doesn't have any concerns about his mother. Therefore her concerns can't possibly be that he is at risk from something external to the library, or his mother would be a possibility. I would expect her to contact whoever she is supposed to report such concerns to in that case - probably some sort of safeguarding officer.

That leaves the safeguarding risk (and we are explicitly told it is a safeguarding risk) to be his location IN the library.

No. We are explicitly told the safeguarding risk was because he was on his own and had then walked off. As I have repeatedly pointed out to you. Did you actually read the OP?

If, as you seem to think, the safeguarding risk was his location IN the library, then why did the library assistant call his home after he had walked off? By that reckoning, the safeguarding risk had already been dealt with.

@dontmakemeshushyou so she would know not to let him do it again?

Being on his own isn't a safeguarding risk at 9 (as it is for a small baby who might start choking on their own spit), so it's going to be something else - people or place. Like a PP's example of gangs recruiting in libraries (which sadly suggests that for many vulnerable kids, there really may be no safe spaces)

@Chouette
so she would know not to let him do it again?

I'm not sure what this sentence refers to.

Being on his own isn't a safeguarding risk at 9

It would be if he is vulnerable and/or isn't meant to be out on his own. The library assistant did not do anything wrong by checking with the child's parent that he was meant to be alone.

Given your responses to my posts, I don't believe you know an awful lot about safeguarding (clue: it has nothing to do with babies choking) so I'm not sure there's much point continuing with this exchange. Besides, I have other things to do this evening so I'll leave this now.

@dontmakemeshush I think we're just talking past each other.

But choking surely does have to do with safeguarding - it's a possible outcome of leaving a young baby alone for too long, which could be neglectful.

Most 9 year olds aren't at risk from being alone. Not even the vulnerable ones. Those that are should have near constant supervision.

Remember, if a child is alone, he is alone. If he's in a library, he's probably not alone. If he's in his bedroom, he probably is. If a vulnerable child is genuinely at risk from being alone, he shouldn't be alone anywhere. I'd assume this might apply to a young child who is vulnerable because they have been sectioned. But probably to someone who is vulnerable because they are a young carer.

Er, probablynot to a young carer. Doh

It does sound overzealous. I always assumed that Under 10s being supervised meant more about leaving them there as a sort of informal childcare, not going in for a few minutes to return and lend a new book, then leave again

Wasn't he supposed to be in school?

Depending on the day and time, it probably was a call to check that he's where he's supposed to be and that he has someone waiting for him at home. She wasn't being a busy body or crazy or wrapping your kid in cotton wool or whatever. She simply checked his story was true.

I would get him a simple phone like an old-style Nokia as PAYG so he can contact you but can't do anything else with it.

Our library is at one end of the high street and DD often went without me around that age as she found shopping boring. Our libary staff was known to her though and they now wear tops with the logo of the company who took the day-to-day running of the libaries but before that they only wore lanyards so I wouldn't worry abou thim not wanting to stay with a stranger.

I come from a different country where the whole idea about ferrying children back and forth all the time is totally unknown, I think we do them a disservice by wrapping them in cotton wool and don't let them do anything alone.

She’d know he was home educated went she checked his card, as it’s on there (slightly different borrowing rights). So no concern there.

I’m reluctant to get a phone tbh as that’s the one thing I worry that could make him a target, from a distance or someone riding up a bike behind you, can’t see the make in time. I’d rather he didn’t have it

That's fair enough.

If the child was in the library during regular school hours that will have drawn attention to him (and is a massive drip feed if so).

I worked in a library for years - no uniform, but we all wore very visible name badges. IIRC the rule was, 8s and under must be accompanied, though this was largely to stop the odd parent thinking we would provide free babysitting for young children while they went shopping or had their hair done - and turned up again 15 or 20 minutes after we closed.

We were close to 2 primary schools and a lot of the older children would come in on their own - never a problem.