Leaving children 'home alone' - what do you think?

[KateMumsnet]

Hello all

A parent is arrested for leaving their child alone every day, according to new research.

The law doesn't currently specify the age at which children can be left on their own - and charges in the last three months of last year involved children between the ages of three months and 14 years.

What do you think? How old were your DC when you left them 'home alone' - and would you like to see the age at which a child can be left unsupervised defined in law?

Well you are wrong then Flower (and pretty insulting to children). I've never seen a group of 6-12 year olds being 'feral'. I've seen them having fun and being kids, I've seen the older ones looking after the younger ones and I've seen the same kids happy and well adjusted at school.

Flowergirl I manage a team of 15 people working with teens in a variety of roles , including CP responsibilities and some legal input. The laws you are referring to don't really operate in the spheres people are talking about here so are a moot point.

However, we weren't at the time talking about teenagers but about 9 and 10 year olds (which later turned into 6-10 year olds). Groups of them, entirely unsupervised and free to do what they wanted is probably pretty feral in my experience!
I do believe I said upthread that I played out at 9/10 with children of a similar age and that we were NOT feral. As the poster who lives in Switzerland said of the children in her village, we all knew the adults had half an eye on us and anyone's gran/neighbour would have waded in to restore order had it EVER been necessary (which I don't recall it was). We all knew that anything daft, or stupid, or actually wrong that we did was liable to be reported back to a parent before we'd even got home ('I saw that girl of yours run out across that road without looking and I would have spoken to her myself but they were all that far away...') This ensured that folly and stupidity were carefully avoided, because you just knew that your parents would find out somehow.

The same applied to my own DC. One of them came home reporting, 'A man spoke to me...' 'Oh yes, what did he say?' 'He said, Are you alright, little girl?' 'Who was it?' 'I don't know...' 'You don't know who it was?' 'I don't know his name. But he is Jo's daddy.'

We were a bit older when we got 'naughty' and more prepared to run risks. like sliding open the sash locks of empty (i.e. unoccupied) houses and nipping in to have a look round. We never did any damage. Similarly, we threw knives, but we were sensible about it: we made a target and stayed out of the way.

Re babysitting, my DD has babysat since she was 14. At 15, she babysat several times up until almost midnight for three children, including a baby under a year. Whose mother, incidentally, has a senior legal position and would, I imagine, be fully aware of any legal ramifications.

I didn't mention it earlier because I didn't want to do the whole "but I work with teens" thing.

FWIW I'm not sure your views represent those of many (and admittedly I'm talking about my experience - over 18 years and 4 who work with teenagers and young people) but are of course your feelings as a mum. This doesn't make them any less valid of course but it needs to be said that clearly even in our sector opinions vary widely.
There is no single teacher, youth worker, SAFE worker, child protection officer "view".

Flower? You watch a group of 10 year olds when playing in the garden?

switzerland sounds great

Mine weren't left until 13 because that's the age we felt appropriate.
I don't like kids on their own after school as they need guidance and help with homework or taking somewhere anyway.

Virginia I've answered that already.

Re the laws I'm sorry but it is not a moot point. This entire thread is about the law that applies to leaving children home alone and the parents who have been cautioned because of it.

And re my views and whether they represent many or not- I have already referred you to the YouGov poll which entirely reflects my views so yes I'm afraid my views do appear to reflect those of "many". The viewpoint that leaving 7 and 8 year olds alone it would seem actually reflects the viewpoint of very few.

And I'll say again, there IS a law!

OK flower if there already is a law, that's great, why do you want another one?

I want clarity Fake as I've said many times. yawn.
I want numbers rather than just a vague notion of age so that parents can make informed choices rather than simply finding themselves facing social services when it goes wrong (as it did for those mentioned in the OP).

The poll, did it specify how long a short time is?

As I said earlier, if that time was 2 mins while the parent went across the road to post a letter, I wonder if that would bring the age down or if 1% of people would still say 18? This is the sort of short time that I would start with, building up from there.

So your fixed age, are you saying that my 90 sec example up thread, the parent is a criminal and deserves to be prosecuted or do you think common sense should prevail?

The question asked was how old do you think a child should be to be left alone in the house for a short period?

It did not specify what short means no but it is worth remembering those RoSPA stats. How long does it take a child to injure themselves do you think? Not long at all I would argue.

I doubt very much that anyone would be prosecuted in that instance Fake- largely because I doubt anyone would ever know (bit like using your mobile when driving it's illegal but people still do it and people often get away with it). The point is though that it might make people stop and think- (as I suspect the ban on mobile phones when driving does).
In your scenario I still don't get why it would be so hard to text/ring another neighbour and ask them to help you out as the kids are in bed and you don't want to leave them. I would entirely understand that if I got a text to that effect.

I personally have had similar situations occur where neighbours have had a parcel that was mine. I've just waited until my daughter was up/hubby was home.

Flower many people who work with teens and children I clearly stated meant. Being as we see teens and children daily: if there was one "right" answer that sector would be unanimous. Because we see a whole range of kids daily, and are trained ... If we all started to agree it would add credence to the "correct" answer.

One of the concerns with the YouGov survey is people who neither have kids nor are affected by kids being left home alone just vote - possibly without much thought or with completely inaccurate views on how mature/immature a 12 year old is.

Please stop the crossed out sighs and so on.
You are not the unanimous voice of reason. You are a mum who happens to work with teenagers and young people.

...just for the record I'm not claiming my ideal age is either.

It did not specify what short means no

Well that's quite significant, don't you think? In my book this rubbishes the poll.

From reading this thread lots of people early on seemed to read 'short time' as about two hours. If it was this long I would probably say, maybe 12, as well. I read 'short time' as five minutes, in which case I'd say a lot younger.

We can do a little (very unscientific) experiment and ask other posters if they were asked the question- 'What age do you think children can be left home alone for a short time' how long would you interpret a 'short time' to be?

One of the concerns with the YouGov survey is people who neither have kids nor are affected by kids being left home alone just vote - possibly without much thought or with completely inaccurate views on how mature/immature a 12 year old is Agreed. My own mum who left me alone every holiday from age 11 comments on DD playing out alone, worrying, forgetting that she did exactly the same!

And

if there was one "right" answer that sector would be unanimous. Because we see a whole range of kids daily, and are trained ... If we all started to agree it would add credence to the "correct" answer

YY to this.

In my own social & family circle there are:
7 x 9-10 year olds. Personally I'd trust 3 or 4 of them alone for, say, an hour.
3 x 11-12 year olds. I'd trust them all.
4 x 13-14 year olds. I'd trust 3 of them.
1 x 17 year old that I wouldn't trust to tie his own shoelaces.

You can't put an age on it when it depends how that child has been bought up. If they have had no 'training' and have no common sense or maturity then they may well be a liability at age 12, but by the same token I have a 9 year old here this morning that has acted as her mothers carer for years and is battling her own illness with a maturity rarely seen in kids under 16.

I doubt very much that anyone would be prosecuted in that instance Fake- largely because I doubt anyone would ever know

OK, let's as an ex or another neighbour (maybe you) finds out and reported to the police. Do you think that the parent should be prosecuted for this?

Perfect Fake. Well done. You have dismissed a, fairly well considered poll. You have suggested that a poll which breaks down age, political stance etc etc and strives to obtain a broad view is garbage and that in fact a group of a handful of people (certainly less than the 100 which were rubbished earlier) would be a better poll group. I think we know the opinions of most on here. I don't think any kind of poll would be necessary. However, I don't think that the handful of people commenting reflect real life. The YouGov poll reflects that.

Fake, if a parent left a 6 year old child alone when the law stated that they weren't allowed to do so until they were 12 then they would have broken the law wouldn't they?

Squ- I haven't used my job to suggest I know all about this and there probably are many people who do exactly what I do and feel differently. My job does though give me an insight into SS and how decisions re CP are taken and into understanding how kids tend to behave in groups. I've had experience of many kids who are fantastic alone but absolutely follow the flock in groups and would (and do!) get up to all sorts if left to their own devices.
I have been professionally shocked by the misconceptions on here- the understanding of where school responsibility ends for instance and the notion that some parents seem to see school as responsible for kids on the walk to and from school.

My job doesn't make me an expert of course it doesn't but on some aspects of this discussion it makes me more knowledgable than some others.

Yes they would and in the example described earlier do you think they should be prosecuted? Do you think they put the child in danger and they need the full force of the law to punish then? Would this be the right thing to do and just what the deserved?

It was bit of a waste of time that poll though wasn't it? It was commissioned by The Times rather than the Gov, so it's an opinion piece rather than a possible policy change, and the DofE quickly commented that parties were unlikely to make a new ruling, insisting that it was up to the parents (who know their children best).

Plus if you can get behind the Times paywall there are a couple of anomalies in the questions, some saying 'a short time' some saying 'an hour' and some saying 'without good reason' - all of which could be interpreted in a number of ways.

However your interpretation of that knowledge has "professionally shocked" me as you do seem incredibly cautious and emotive about some elements. You'll have to take it on trust that I'm not lax or hands off at work (and neither is my team, in fact we have a reputation as being a tight ship) but honestly most/many NT 11 year olds are capable of more than they are being credited with here.