Free range kids/slow parenting - anyone heard of this?

[Ewe]

I just noticed on Twitter that Lenore Skenazy is going to be on AlphaMummy for a webchat, having no clue who she is or what she does I googled and she is the author or a blog/book about free range kids/slow parenting.

As I understand it, it's about giving your children lots of freedom (she lets her 9 year old ride the subway for example) and is seen as antithesis of "overparenting".

So, just wondered if anyone here follows the books or could explain a bit more? Is it just to encourage us not to be so worried/risk averse with our children? There seem to be some interesting theories surrounding it, it sounds like it's fairly rare behaviour, or are most parents naturally pretty relaxed and it's a 'movement' of nothing?

I only have a 2yr old so not massively relevant for me right now (or is it?) but just intrigued.

FFS No I clearly wouldn't compare letting my children have freedom with actual neglect. Benign neglect is a recognised 'parenting style' (for want of a better word) and I'm certainly not the first to use it.

Look at this thread for example.

I would love to go back to the way things were when I was a kid, with kids all playing out etc, but unfortunately I think it does work best when it is the "norm" rather than a "parenting choice", as, as someone else said, when everyone parents this way other parents will be readier to step in to help (or chastise!) someone else's child. Nowadays we are too conditioned to seeing children with a parent within eyesight, so a lone child seems to raise concern, rather than watchfulness

I admit, I would be worried that if anything did go wrong, as well as having to deal with the fallout of that I would have to endure the "told-you-so" attitude of others, which I'm not sure I would be strong enough to cope with, in those circumstances. We have always been pretty laid back with the kids, and trusted them to find their own limits (within reason), but a few weeks ago, ds fell from the trampoline and broke his collarbone, and we felt very guilty- DH was there, just not hovering. We are determined not to let this incident turn us into those nervous, hovering parents, but when something happens it is hard to shrug off the (real or imagined!) disapproval.

However, I would love to think the tides are changing, and the over-cautious, almost hysterical era of parenting is coming to an end. Would make it far easier to have the courage of my convictions (which are that children are missing out today)

I stand by the fact it is a horrible term to use and insulting if you want to use it you will have to except that others may not like the term ffs

Fair enough and I'm sorry if you were offended but I don't think you'll stop people using it because it is an accepted term across several disciplines including economics.

I accept that you don't like the and may have been shocked to see it used if you hadn't ever seen it used before. Just accept, please, that not used with any attention of disrespecting neglected children.

intention

Yes, Wasabi, rather like 'eccentric' v. 'crazy'.

chegirl - my great aunt and uncle felt similarly raising mixed race children in London in the 60s, and were particularly worried about their boy. The notion that the world has changed for the worse and our generation will set it aright is hardly a new one.

I think the idea that we have all become much more fussy is as much a media construct as the idea that the world is more dangerous. The main reason you don't tend to see young children playing out in the street all day is because they are in childcare so both parents can work. As has been pointed out, once the number of children playing out falls below a critical mass it becomes less safe and less fun.

skidoodly, I agree with all your post. I don't see the super-fussy helicopter parent that we supposedly have all become. I (mostly, among my friend) see balanced parents doing their thing.

And ruckyrunt, the term benign neglect infuriates me too, and have said so on other threads. I leave my kids to play alone to get on with it loads, they do many risky things. But they have parents who have an overall idea of their safety and feed them and are there to read a bedtime story at night and give them a cuddle should they want one. And therefore are not neglected by any sense of the term. 'Benign neglect' is an insult to all those children who are very capable of sorting out a meal for themselves and entertaining themselves all day til they are allowed back home but actually need their parents to look after them. Nowt 'benign' about it.

I agree with everyone else who has pointed out that it must depend massively on your DCs and circumstances as to how acceptable this type of parenting is to you. For example, we live in the lake district, middle of nowhere, and I happily let DS (2yo) play out front by himself. I certainly wouldn't do that if we lived in the middle of Alum Rock, Birmingham for example (I use it because I have lived there. No offence intended to anyone who still does!)

I was a bit confused about the latest post on Lenore's blog though (thanks to whoever linked it). Is she saying it's okay for a 34 year old to force a 13yo to touch her breast and kiss him and ask him for sex???

I was shocked by the 'Show your support for Michelle and her attorney and join us on ARC Radio as we delve into another case where the punishment does not fit the crime!'

Unfortunately, it undermines the everything she has previously said, because I now feel like she is saying my DC are only in danger if they actually die or are maimed in some way, and sexual/psychological damage doesn't matter.

Anyone else read this?

i agree with OMDB much earlier down the thread. it shouldn't need a manual or this type of thing.

but as i was the mum who chucked her kids out and said 'come back when street lights are on' i wish i'd have made it into a book - i wudda been rich.

i might advocate a new type of parenting the 'i've had bigger cuts on mi arse' type paranting, where if your kid falls over and isn't seriously injured you say 'ive had bigger cuts on mi arse, you'll be reet' instead of 'oh oh my darling, are you ok, oh dear your bleeding, oh dear'

yes yes i might make milions - how to extrapolate this into a book?

custardo

these kinds of books generally only have one point that is made over and over again - so think of as many ways as you can to say 'ive had bigger cuts on mi arse, you'll be reet'

then some other pointless rules (e.g. never offer bacon as a reward)

finally some cod theory behind how it works (this is particularly plausible if you talk about the brain as though it is an electrical circuit) and make lots of reference to it being damaged BEFORE the child is verbal, so that way nobody can ever check

Basically only complete buck-eejits will ever read a book like this but you can use it to get yourself loads of publicity and get paid to fill the media with your "expert" views.

You write the book, I'll be your manager - we'll be REET!

your on! i like the bacon reference

As far as dh is concerned, world has changed for the better: he was never allowed to ride a bike, as there was too much traffic where they lived in London in the sixties. His son spends many happy hours out on his bike and we still live in a city- but not London.

My dd is only 3.2 years with absolutely no safety concept at all so will not be doing that for a bit. I do let her play on her own in the garden whilst i do Mumsnet housework.

It's a brilliant idea and it's what generations of kids have been doing since the begining of time.
I had 'slow parents' they just let us do what we wanted and from the age of 7yrs old, my brother and I would spend all day in the woods by our flats and even cook our own lunch on an open fire!
We would take a frying pan, some bacon and eggs and spend the day making a den and a camp and just having fun.
But of course these days, kids don't seem to be allowed to be 'bored'
My DD1 wants to have a playdate with a friend and there is no 'window' in the other child's diary for playdates.#
She goes out every single evening, so is not home from 8am until 7pm everyday.