Children walking to school on their own

[Outofwater]

Since March I have been letting my two DC walk to their state primary school on their own some days. The DC1 is 9 (turns 10 in six weeks) and DC2 is 8.5. Both are fairly responsible children - never in trouble in school. They've been attending the same school since reception.

The location is inner suburb. The distance walked is about 400m. The first 200m or so is to the end of our road of terraced houses (without proper gardens, i.e. front doors of the houses are a couple of metres from the pavement) to a T-junction with a secondary high street. The next 150m is along the high street which has cafes, hairdressers, church, pizza, gym, then turn into the street the school is on (the school is not on the high street but is immediately behind the shops IYSWIM). It takes them 7-10 minutes, depending on how fast they walk and long they have to wait for the pedestrian crossing (see below). The school has a very small catchment (one form entry) and so most children live quite close.

This evening DP and I received the following email from their headmistress (paraphrased and abbreviated):

"It has been brought to my attention that DC1 and DC2 are, on occasion, walking to school on their own. This has raised concern for a couple of reasons. Firstly, we do allow Year 5 children to travel to school on their own, but ask that parents let us know, in case a child doesn't arrive. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, we are worried that DC1 is responsible for DC2, who is too young to be travelling to school without an adult. This raises safeguarding concerns."

I had a similar sort of walk to school in a fairly similar setting in the European country where I grew up. At DC1's age I also taking my younger sister with whom there was a much bigger age gap (3.5 years rather than 1.5 years) and going to her school first, dropping her off, and then going to my school.

I think given the ages of the girls the email is a bit over the top, particularly the bit about leaving D1 responsibility for D2. There's only 17 months between them and it's common for people to think they're twins. There is obviously a maturity gap between them but (unlike my childhood experience) it's very much two sisters walking to school together compared with one taking the other to school.

TBH I wouldn't be comfortable with either DC walking to school on their own but I'm much more relaxed about them walking together. I looked on the school website for policies and read everything that is there - but there is nothing about journey to school. I'm sure if I asked I would be told that it is "generally understood" or was in a newsletter that I got at some stage in the year.

I spoke with both DCs about the email and DC2 suggested the headmistress had sent the email to cover herself from liability (DC2 is a cynical one).

I'm fine to bring the DCs to school everyday but I really wanted to give them the sense of independence that I got walking on my own. If the school won't let DC2 walk to school until Y5 DC1 will have gone to secondary so DC1 and DC2 will never get the chance to walk to school on their own. I do think the email is a bit OTT, especially the reference to safeguarding which I read as the implicit threat of being reported to social services if I don't do what they tell me.

The better part of me says to just suck it up and accept it and that's what I will do. However, I wanted to get thoughts on whether I am way out of line with social norms.

Wasn’t he 6 years old and walking alone

I was going to say the same about the little boy going missing on his way to school in the 90s and being murdered (by a 13 year old.) I too walked to and from school at age 7 in the 70s but I can definitely see it from the Head's point of view as if they didn't turn up they'd want to deal with it as a matter of urgency.

Op, it's only 5 months until your younger dd is in Year 5 isn't it? So just say you'll wait til they are Year 5 and 6 and then let her know they'll be walking unaccompanied. Unless you want dd1 to walk separately from you dropping dd2.

OP’s DC are currently Y3 and Y5, so DC2 won’t be Y5 until next September.

They would have rights once the child is on school grounds. They would also have rights when releasing a child from their care I would imagine.
No school is going to agree to do something which they genuinely consider a direct risk to that child.
The rules are set and told to you before you child joins the school. You have to sign a contract stating amongst other things that you agree for your child to wear the correct uniform and follow the policy’s such as entering and leaving school grounds with a parent or guardian.
If you repeatedly did not follow these rules (particularly around safety of the child) things would be taken further and arrangements would be made. If no arrangements and agreements could be reached with the parents, the child would no longer be able to attend our school ultimately. Would be a long drawn out process and every effort would be made to accommodate but at the end of the day if the school thinks you are putting your child at risk (and ours deem letting children enter school unaccompanied under y5 a risk) then further steps will be taken.

@Silverswirl You imagine wrong. What happens (from many years of working in multiple schools) is that the HT reiterates their policy then depending on the school one of three things happens if the parent insists…

1. The school realise they do not have the authority and back down, insisting on a letter from the parent giving permission (the most common thing)
2. The school push and waste everyone’s time with endless meetings and letters, they may even take advice from SS, but ultimately back down (seen that happen 3/4 times)
3. They contact SS, who back them up, because there are actual and proper concerns about the journey (seen this once and it was part of an ongoing issue of neglect)

this is not in the school’s remit to decide. The simply rely on parents assuming that it is and not pushing.

I walked to school, on my own, aged 4. But, it was a three minute walk and no roads. I think by aged 7 most kids can manage it- depending on the route. My dd, aged 9, was stopped from leaving school on her own and our house is at the back of the school. I do understand that they have best interests of child in mind, but that's ridiculous.

Primary teacher here.
This sort of thing really does vary massively by school and area.

When I worked in a London suburb, only Year 6 were allowed to walk alone and only with parental written permission, plus they were not allowed to take younger siblings.

Now I work in a small very rural town - children with written permission are allowed to walk alone from Year 4 upwards. But the vast majority of them walk in large groups.

You just have to abide by whatever your school's age limit is.

YANBU and neither are the school although the tone of the email sounds a bit snotty & officious.
When I lived in Germany groups of tiny school children with massive back packs used to traipse past my door every morning and after my initial surprise according to colleagues absolutely perfectly normal. Kids go to very local school & drivers super sensible & pedestrians have right of way.
Otoh I am only just letting my yr6 walk home now this term - it's over a mile & there is a big road where cars regularly jump the lights so we've been practising during winter & now clocks have changed she's allowed. I personally wouldn't give responsibility of younger child to older child but accept your logic & right to parent in your own way.
Of course you are parent and have ultimate choice. School are covering themselves in terms of liability & implying they will involve SS if you continue.
Nothing to stop you explaining to school exactly as you have here risk assessment, ages. Maybe give oldest a phone to tell you when they have arrived (depending on phone policy of course)
Either they accept or they refer to SS.
Sad reflection of our litigious / blame culture society but these are social norms in country you are choosing to live in 🤷‍♀️

Ultimately, if you want "European standards" then you need to go to a European school.

You're equating your child saying she's learning nothing has any relevance to this topic about child safety in England!

If you left your children at those ages at home and there was an incident, you'd most likely be charged with endangering their lives as they're not deemed old enough at 8 and 9 years.

Your children's head has simply outlined that such young children walking to school is a safeguarding concern. Which it is. Their safety is at increased risk. Doesn't matter if you believe low risk for this 400m, its a greater risk than you walking with them.

From September, the school's policy would not be a concern as both would be year 5 I think? If not, it means that currently your Year 3 child is walking with a Year 5 child. So fully understand their concerns if that's the case.

What happens at secondary is irrelevant in this discussion as that's up to you if you feel that it's then appropriate for your child to travel unaccompanied in London to a school that's your prerogative. Expectations for safeguarding children at secondary age, ie in 16 months time, are entirely different.

You sound like a bit of nightmare tbh with the various chips on your shoulders.

When mine were at Primary my son walked from yr 5. But school was in the next road snd friend knocked for him. My daughter didn't as she was lazy and I had to drop her on my way to work.
School sounds bonkers.

It's a valid point that they should make parents aware of the Year 5 rule, as many won't have grown up with that, including many English parents actually. Mention that when you reply. The other issues you could raise separately too.

But the OPs school allow year 5 kids to travel on their own like your son did.

Unfortunately, in this day and age it's unusual for children in primary school to walk there without an adult, so I can see that it would be sensible to let the school know about it, so that they (and then, presumably, you) are quickly alerted to any potential problem when the child doesn't show up at school.

Other than that, I don't think it's any of the school's business how its pupils make their way to and from school.

OP here. Just coming back on some of the responses which indicate exactly the issue that I and other posters find so troubling.

@TheMadGardener It really concerns me that you claim to be a primary teacher and have written such an ignorant response. I do not "just have to abide by whatever your school's age limit is". I don't interfere with how the school deals with things during the school day and the school should not start policing how I raise my children outside of the school day. The examples you give illustrate exactly my point: small rural town allowing children to walk alone two years earlier than London suburb. What's the reason for the difference? (I not that you did not give one.) That the large majority of primary school heads are white British and share the white British perception that diverse and multicultural areas are more dangerous than rural areas that lack diversity. It saddens, but does not surprise me, that as a primary teacher you seem to have a complete inability to think critically about anything but just bleat out "the rules the rules".

@ChoiceMummy Where do I start with your tirade? Another white British person who can't handle the idea that immigrants to Britain should speak up about anything. White British people are a minority in London you know. In any case, as is evidenced by what the many Scottish posters have said about the situation in Scotland, and what TheMadGardener said about differences between suburban London and rural areas, this is not a case of some general British standard.

It's interesting to read posters on this thread saying "ooh, London, dangerous, would never let my children walk alone there". I wonder how many of those posters actually live in London (or could afford to - bitchy I know!). I think those people should wind their necks in a little.

Plenty of very white areas only allow kids to walk alone to school in year 5 or 6. It's incorrect that it's a racist thing.

So have you decided how to respond to the teacher? Will you tell her she needs to publicise the rule or will you tell her you will be ignoring the rule?

"Plenty of very white areas only allow kids to walk alone to school in year 5 or 6. It's incorrect that it's a racist thing."

I never said it was "a racist thing". I did say it was a "diversity thing" and a function of an (incorrect) perception among a portion of white British people that more diverse areas are more dangerous areas. It's like the way for years white British people would say that they were moving out of London to one of the home counties because the state schools there were better than those in London. That was never actually the case. Now after about 20 years of data and London state schools moving further ahead of those in the rest of England (including SE England outside London), it's just about getting through to these people that their perception may not be correct.

I do feel that that with best intentions some people are actually de skilling young people and it’s ironically making them more at risk. You sound sensible and you should be allowed to decide this for your children. Just tell the school you will be continuing to send them in walking and then they know to contact you first if they don’t arrive. I work in attendance and we always inform parents in the AM if their children don’t arrive.

You need to take your children to school. Your school is quite right to call you out on this.

There you go then OP 😂😂 The pronouncement has been made and no need for further debate

Yanbu. As a parent, it is up to you to judge and risk assess the situation. An 8 year old and a 9 year old are perfectly capable of walking 400m to school. Of course there are risks - there are soaks is blooming everything! But kids have to learn a bit of independence and risk assessment at some point! There are also risks in teaching your kids that everything in the world is dangerous and giving them the message that they are completely helpless, dependent and useless.

Our school has a blanket rule that only year 5 and 6 are allowed to walk to school alone and it pisses me off. I would happily let my shy 8 year old walk the 1/3 of a mile to her school if this wasn't the case. We have been teaching her about road safety recently and letting her play out - it's been amazing seeing how much her self confidence has grown!

Reading with interest. DS is going to be 9 this summer and most of his peers walk to school by themselves already. However, we live in a small rural town, with a lot of car free walking routes. If DS was comfortable enough to do it, I would happily wave him off.

We moved last year and our old school was adamant about children being accompanied until Year 5 as it was a city suburb with major roads and speeding drivers. I do think a lot of the age disparity between schools is down to road safety. I sometimes wish we had never invented cars; the amount of room and mental space they take up is immense.

OP, I am a teacher and have sent similar letters in the past. I think it is important to remember that there are people out there who are genuinely worried about your children. Even if you disagree, that letter comes from a place of concern. Somebody has seen your children walking to school, or overheard them talking about it, and raised it as a concern for all the right reasons.

Really, the letter is saying that they would have liked to know that your Y5 child was walking to school alone so they could prioritise a call home if she didn't turn up, and it is a worry that your Y5 pupil may feel responsible for her little sister at an age when she should not feel such responsibility. If anything happened to the younger child, I daresay the older one would feel awful about it.

There is really no need to do anything other than go in and explain that this is a considered family decision and will be continuing. They will log it on their internal systems as a concern, incase other concerns arise in future years that suggest a pattern of neglect. They will not report it to the MASH because it doesn't meet the threshold for any sort of intervention.

Imagine if someone raised this as a concern and the school ignored it, and something awful happened to your children. They would rightly be heavily criticised. I understand why you feel indignant, but can understand I'm sure that they are acting entirely appropriately.

"I think it is important to remember that there are people out there who are genuinely worried about your children. Even if you disagree, that letter comes from a place of concern."

Younger sister, not little sister. The two girls are the same approximate height and weight. They look out for each other. DC2 would feel just as responsible if anything happened to DC1. I think there's an element of people simply not getting that.

I am aware that some of the white English middle class mothers drinking half a bottle of wine or more most evenings. A couple of them have even openly admitted that they have a drink problem. I'm aware that the culture around drinking alcohol is different in different countries. Frankly, in my family we would see that sort of drinking as a concern. But I recognise that there are cultural differences and I don't go to the school and say I have concerns about other people's children as a result.

In London the majority of parents are not white English. Schools need to stop privileging the biases of white English parents and expecting the rest of us to conform to them.

If you think a child is at risk because his mum drinks too much wine in the evening, you have a duty to report it. But I don't think they really are at risk in that situation, do you?

Honestly, do you think the person who saw your children walking to school unaccompanied and felt worried about them, should have kept their worry to themselves? Should they know that this was a considered decision and not neglect?

Once raised with the school, should the school have ignored it?

And to all those posters saying traffic in London is more dangerous than in rural England and that's the reason why children can be let walk to school at a lower age in rural England, the statistics show the contrary:
lginform.local.gov.uk/reports/lgastandard?mod-metric=305&mod-area=E92000001&mod-group=AllRegions_England&mod-type=namedComparisonGroup

The number of road deaths and serious injuries of children aged 0-15 relative to population of 0-15 year olds is lower in London than in any other English region.