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.

Why are you so cross that the school are worried about your children?

The alternative would be worse imo.

Safeguarding concerns have to be dealt with robustly, without emotion, without ore-judging which parents are neglectful and which seem like lovely people so can't possibly be neglecting their children, we'll give them the benefit of the doubt.

Just tell them this is what will be happening, and that will be the end of it.

I absolutely hate schools thinking they get a say in this. It’s a cultural thing in UK and America to be so obsessed with children doing simple things like walking to school being unimaginably dangerous.

My son started to walk to school shortly before his 9th birthday. It’s mad that he is the only one in the year to do so. We live in a very safe, quiet area! If there was any sanity most of the kids would walk to school.
I’m thinking of gearing up for an argument with the school to let him walk home too!

its insane to put in blanket rules on these very rare cases. We don’t ban cars because people get run over. A sensible safe life is not one with no risks, it’s one with a sensible assessment of risks and benefits. Children being in independence is not a good thing.

I have a friend who is a child psychologist and her and her colleagues say that 14 year olds are further behind in their development than their peers 20 years ago. Children have very little unsupervised time to develop those emotional, social and cognitive skills. Structured adult supervised activities has severe limits in allowing development for children.

its insane to put in blanket rules on these very rare cases. We don’t ban cars because people get run over. A sensible safe life is not one with no risks, it’s one with a sensible assessment of risks and benefits. Children being in independence is not a good thing.

I have a friend who is a child psychologist and her and her colleagues say that 14 year olds are further behind in their development than their peers 20 years ago. Children have very little unsupervised time to develop those emotional, social and cognitive skills. Structured adult supervised activities has severe limits in allowing development for children.

"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?"

It seems likely that the person was another parent and someone who at least knew who my DC1 and DC2 are. It's a small school - one form entry. And a fairly small catchment area: DC1 barely got in and we live b/t 250 and 300m from the school as the crow flies. DC1 and DC2 are very well-behaved and sensible children. They also do well academically. They go to many after school (but outside school) activities that other children go to. We've lived in the area for 10 years and know most of the other parents and many of the governors of the school. We spoke with at least a dozen other families about our decision to let the girls walk to school by themselves. So I don't really buy the idea that someone thought that our decision was anything other than a considered decision.

It's a Catholic school and, I think as a result, gets parents of two types that seem superficially similar but are actually quite different in many attitudes. The first is the white English (and some American) middle class parents who shelter their children quite a lot relative to the average and, perhaps related to that, a higher percentage of SAHPs than is the case at non-faith state schools. The second are the white European, Asian, African and South American parents, who send their children to a Catholic school because they are Catholic and also, in part, because it is more diverse than the local non-faith state schools. In very general terms, the first group dominate the PTA and can sometimes talk down to the second group. I do feel what happened with us is a perfect example of the "policing" of immigrant parents (or parents of immigrant backgrounds) by a certain cohort.

That's good as it shows that letting kids walk to school on their own at 10+ is cutting road deaths.

That was in response to op saying child road deaths are lower in London

If you are from outside the UK you are maybe unaware of the impact Soham in 2002 had on the UK culture and attitudes to children walking without adults. Before this even 5 year olds walked alone. After almost none until secondary age.

"If you are from outside the UK you are maybe unaware of the impact Soham in 2002 had on the UK culture and attitudes to children walking without adults. Before this even 5 year olds walked alone. After almost none until secondary age."

I'm very aware of Soham. I don't think it has much relevance at all to this situation. I can't do anything about what seems to be a profound irrationality at the heart of much of English society. The lesson to be learnt from Soham is for schools to stop employing teaching assistants. The studies show teaching assistants generally add zero value and in some circumstances can be a negative for children's learning. That's a whole separate issue, but it's interesting to see how a poster just throws out Soham as if it shows anything.

What has the soham case got to do with anything! Those girls were 10 years old and it was in the school hols.

Did it? Not that I’ve seen. They weren’t walking to school and kids have been murdered out and about before and since and so have secondary age children. It’s more dangerous to not equip them with any street awareness and they just let them walk to secondary because the are arbitrarily old enough!

OP, do you really think that the school have done this to upset or antagonise you?

Several pp have explained why they had to follow up on a reported concern.

Saying that you have lived there for ten years etc is a red herring. Climbie's mother worked in the school. We remain impartial when investigating a reported concern.

I feel that you are metaphorically shouting 'don't you know who I am' in an affronted way. Step back, see that people care about your kids and don't take it personally.

I’m confused about what you are saying about Victoria Climbie? Wasn’t she killed by her great aunt?

I'm sorry. I've confused two cases. I can't remember the name of the child now, awfully. But the point is that we are taught in safeguarding training that we can't make judgments about whether someone does or does not appear guilty, we just report and investigate. We are also told that parents won't mind because if they're innocent they'll understand that it is all just about keeping children safe, but op clearly does feel affronted.

@ChoiceMummy "You have no idea of my colour." I know exactly what you are. And don't make me laugh about "standards of care" in England. How many elderly people are dumped in substandard care homes to be cared for by largely immigrant workers. Whom do you mean by "we" - just white British people, not immigrants? Get some help.

Ahh I see what you mean now, thanks.

I’m in a london suburb and no way I’d let my children walk alone at that age. If you’re so furious go and book an appointment with the head, might get you somewhere instead of arguing with strangers on the net about it. And no I probably wouldn’t let my kids at that age walk in my native wales, my god-daughters are same age and do not walk alone

@Darbs76 Already spoke with the head. Had a good conversation. A lot of the points discussed in this thread came up. I think this forum is for debating these issues. Interesting that you say "no way" you'd let your children walk alone in London but you "probably wouldn't" let them walk alone in Wales. Certainly indicates some difference in your mind between the two locations. What is the basis for that?

You've chosen to live in England, either get on board with the standards of care we expect towards our vulnerable members of society or leave to kcie somewhere that doesn't have such concerns re their vulnerable members of society. 😂😂I'm just reminded of the government discharging untested patients to care homes. Compared to most other European countries the Uk doesn't give a shit about vulnerable members of society. Loving the superior colonial attitude though 😂.

As for the rest of your post, that's plain nasty, empathy fail? @ChoiceMummy 🙀

"I know exactly what you are."

I genuinely cannot understand why you are so furious about this. It might not be a perfect system, but people caring about your kids is a good thing. The whole thing could've been sorted in ten minutes if you'd gone into school or rung up to sort it out.

You are so defensive that people in rl will start to wonder whether there's more to this story. Do you think you might feel a bit guilty, maybe it is more your decision than the girls', maybe they would like you to walk them to school?

Just come back to this thread and wow, OP, you have responded incredibly rudely to myself and other posters.

Are you this aggressive and confrontational when speaking to staff at your child's school? They must love you.

I don't "claim" to be a primary teacher. I've been a primary teacher since 1992.

I can't fathom how you have decided that British schools decide on their rules for appropriate ages for children to walk alone based on the racial or cultural diversity of the area they are walking through. For your information, the head teacher in my London school who refused to let children below Year 6 walk alone was a Black head teacher. The head teacher in my current school who allows Year 4s to walk alone is white. Is this relevant? 🙄

I did not give a reason why I thought the rules were different in my London school to the rural town where I am now. However, the London school was very close to a main arterial road with extremely heavy traffic including lots of buses, delivery drivers weaving in and out of traffic, fast-moving cyclists, some very aggressive driving etc. It was surrounded by other busy roads and most of the pavements were very crowded during rush hours. In this rural town the roads are much, much quieter, children don't have to jostle with crowds of pedestrians on the pavements and there is a large pedestrianised area in the middle of town which helps children to avoid traffic.

I'm sure you will want to reply and tell me how ridiculous and racist my comments are so I won't bother coming back to this thread. Wishing your children safe journeys to school and their teachers good luck when listening to your rants.

@justfiveminutes I was not going to respond to your earlier comments because they just seemed to be misunderstandings by someone misreading posts, but you latest post is offensive. It amounts to a claim that if a parent objects to school imposed rules it means they are neglecting their children.

In a previous post you wrote the same thing: "We are also told that parents won't mind because if they're innocent they'll understand that it is all just about keeping children safe, but op clearly does feel affronted."

I worries me that someone with such attitudes is involved in child protection to the extent that they are going on safeguarding courses. The fact that by your own admission you made claims about the case of Victoria Climbie that were wrong ("I'm sorry. I've confused two cases.") doesn't inspire with me confidence either.

How exactly do you think "the whole thing could've been sorted in ten minutes if you'd gone into school or rung up to sort it out"? There are only two alternatives here. My DC are allowed to go to school without me accompanying them or they are not. This is not some misunderstanding - it is a point of difference.

This isn't entirely true. I was 14 in 2002. My youngest sibling, born in 1997, would have been 5. All of us, and all my classmates, were collected by parents in the 90s.
There were quite a few high profile abductions before 2002. I won't mention their names, because you never know if their families may come across these posts. But the case you refer to was not the only one, nor the first. Nor, sadly, the last.

"but you latest post is offensive. It amounts to a claim that if a parent objects to school imposed rules it means they are neglecting their children."

Well I've consistently tried to help you by explaining why they wrote to you, how you could easily resolve the issue, and why it is a good thing that you are checking up on your children.

I also tried to reassure you that they would have your children's best interests at heart, and that it wouldn't be personal.

I thought my input might help you to be less upset, as I am a teacher and have been involved in a great many similar situations.

So I am genuinely sorry that you feel that I have misunderstood elements of your story, have misread your posts, am offensive.

However I must just respond to these two points :

"ow exactly do you think "the whole thing could've been sorted in ten minutes if you'd gone into school or rung up to sort it out"? There are only two alternatives here. My DC are allowed to go to school without me accompanying them or they are not. This is not some misunderstanding - it is a point of difference."

They can't stop you from allowing your children to walk to school unaccompanied. They need only show that they followed up on the concern and were reassured by your response. It does not meet the threshold for MASH involvement.

"I worries me that someone with such attitudes is involved in child protection to the extent that they are going on safeguarding courses."

The attitude that we have to investigate if a concern is raised, without judgement or personal opinion, that this is a good thing, that parents generally do see it as a good thing and understand why we have to do it? Yes, that has been my experience.

"The fact that by your own admission you made claims about the case of Victoria Climbie that were wrong."
Yes, I muddled the names and have apologised.