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?

Fascinating thread, albeit somewhat circular.

I remember once being shocked on a MN thread by people who wouldn't leave their child "alone" to go and hang out washing in the garden. I am frequently shocked by the brigade who wouldn't leave a child "alone" in a car to pay for petrol, whenever this thorny issue is raised on MN. I have always done both without a thought.

I have also done many things now frowned upon - I put all my babies in their own room at home from about 6/8 weeks for naps and at night. I have added infant formula to cooled water to mix feeds - the advice about hot water needed to kill the bacteria in the formula was unheard of then. I have left them asleep upstairs in a very small hotel, with a baby monitor, while I ate in the restaurant downstairs. I have also left them asleep with a baby listening service at a Mark Warner hotel whilst I ate in the restaurant, which everyone did on Mark Warner holidays, pre Madeleine. Later, on annual camping holidays my children have had a lot of freedom to roam the campsite from a young age, just like everyone else's.

I would also be surprised if I hadn't nipped out to the postbox leaving a child as young as 4, either asleep or safely occupied, for 2 mins. Having twins, I would definitely have left one "alone" in the house (in a playpen) whilst taking one out to the car, then come back for the other leaving the first one "alone" in the car with a sibling.

The only one of these that I would probably do differently now is the Mark Warner hotel - but I am sure that they have probably changed their childcare arrangements anyway.

I think that as a culture, as someone said up thread, we have become increasingly fearful and risk-averse. Sites like MN don't necessarily help IMHO - I remember one poster going through agonies on a thread because she needed to put her young twins in a different room to sleep as she simply didnt have any space to keep them in her room and most responses were telling her she shouldn't. When mine were small I did what felt right, without worrying about what other people thought. A lot of Internet strangers telling me I shouldn't would have been the last thing I needed.

A perfect example of excessive aversion to risk is our primary school. A few years ago regular helpers in school had to have a CRB check. Fine, and understandable. Now, you can't even walk a crocodile of children somewhere with a teacher and other helpers (eg for a church service) as a one-off without a CRB even though there is no prospect of being alone with a child. A CRB check really doesn't prove much - Jimmy Savile would have passed.

Another example - a friend was attending an early morning meeting in school, and sat her year 6 child on a chair in the corridor reading a book. The child was forced to go to breakfast club as it was deemed "unsafe" to be left "alone" in the corridor.

And one final example - last year, when he was 10, one of my twins went on an errand for me to a shop just round the corner - 2/3 minute walk, no roads to cross. One of the teachers from school saw him go in and waited outside. When he came out she gave him a real grilling about what was he doing, where did he live, did his mum know where he was (she asked this repeatedly). He came home rather shaken, feeling, as a result of the grilling, that he had done something wrong. On the one hand it was good to know the teacher cared, but on the other I was a bit cross that she had shaken his confidence and made him think he was in trouble. At exactly the same age in the 1970s, my friend and I were sent to the post office every lunch time by our teacher to bank the tuck shop takings, buy him a ham barm for lunch and 20 silk cut!! And, yes, I played out with friends, walked home on my own and let myself in with a key and made myself a snack before anyone else came home - all from juniors (year 3).

I will now sit back and wait to be told what a neglectful parent I am....

Wow love the fact when people are losing an argument they start throwing random crap! I'm begining to wonder if mners are who they claim to be, I mean to think leaving a child home alone are the nutty ones!
Fake you are beyond belief with your scenarios ... Is snow rush hour 5mins? Reality check maybe you been watching to much blue peter as your posts are held together with sticky back plastic!
Yes I said I wouldn't comment but I Had to because I actually think we should all move on from this merry go round :) its proven the home aloners brigade are a minority that use it as "independence" for there child when they really mean child care or errand running etc etc
Please feel free to return the backlash but remember once the insults start the argument has been lost
Anyway I know I've won :)

I will now sit back and wait to be told what a neglectful parent I am....

And should be prosecuted!

Have you seen the poster who things a mum who left a child sleeping in bed while she makes the 90 sec trip across the road (with a monitor) to give something to a nieghbour should prosecuted for such behaviour.

Plenty of people really can't see that they are actually making things worse not better.

2boys2girls

Yes you're right we never have ice on roads, and nobody would drive during the rush hour.

Frank don't be to hard on self , but in away yes I agree with the label you've given yourself

Hello fake ... I meant it would not be 5mins ?
But its OK you can win this one, we'll let you 'collective' you

And frank in the petrol station threads there's always the poster who fears the car might explode while she's paying for petrol so therefore it's safer to try to shepherd a baby and couple of toddlers across the busy forecourt.

You haven't 'won' anything and why is the scenario with snow etc not Ok. It's perfectly reasonable. I had to nip out yesterday to collect prescriptions I needed. On my bike I was there and back in 15 mins or I could have bundled all the kids up and taken them out in the howling wind and hail etc. Which would have taken at least twice as long to walk there and back (to windy for little ones to ride their bikes).

So I went on my own leaving them all at home. I made sure little ones were occupied,they knew where I was going etc. And all was fine. If for example the fire alarm had gone off they all know what to do, ditto an accident and I was contactable.

given trees blowing down, wheely bins blowing about, the way people often drive more dangerously in bad weather I would say they were safer in the house.

As for flowers statistics,as on another thread she is completely misunderstanding them. And behaving in the same manner as she did on that thread, being obtuse and missing the point. And the rospa advice is not to not leave children alone it's about making sure your home is safe. Ie stair gates for little kids, not to use baby walkers, to fit fire alarms, sort out blind cords etc. Most accidents are very young children with parents there (under fives) They don't say not to leave children alone.

And they list car and traffic accidents separately, but they account for a third of deaths to children I believe. Given most children are in a car far less time than they are in a house that is quite significant.

But it's not about winning an argument, I am just baffled by the lack of common sense and the inability to risk asess properly. Even rospa say not to wrap children in cotton wool and thar over protection creates problems. Children are far more capable than we give them credit for and it's not fair to them to stunt development and delay independence. They don't magically mature age 10/12/16 or 18. It's a learning process and done in baby steps but it's our job as parents to help and guide them in this process. Hence little bits of independence and responsibility along the way. Teaching them gradually, allowing leeway for the different circumstances and for different children is being a sensible parent. If I never let ds3 do anything, and then in a year's time I just expect him to go get the bus to high school (public bus not school) I would be failing him. As it is he is learning gradually and gaining in confidence and the skills necessary for the transition to high school.

I don't care about winning an argument on a forum, it's just debate. Real life matters,,my kids matter and parenting them sensibly matters. Not triumphantly announcing I win and posting smug passive aggressive faces.

Indeed fake!

2boys - I didn't actually give myself that label but I was anticipating being given it by you and flower.

I actually think people like you two are not in the majority because it is all a question of degree. I think most people wouldn't regard popping to knock for a parcel on a neighbours door as leaving children alone. Or hanging out washing! Only a tiny minority would consider it reasonable to leave eg a 6 year old for 2 hours. I would hazard a guess that most of the many many parents I know have popped out to post a letter or some such without taking all and sundry and without worrying about social services.

Bless you all, its good you still bleating on about such matters.
Prize in post :) just please be in when postman comes knocking,
I personally think frank sumed you all up when she called herself neglectful, maybe a parenting course may help? Sure local children's centres would be willing to help you minority xxxxxx

"All and sundry" being the children you gave birth to Always?

Another quote for you-

'The first section of the children and Young Persons Act 1933 states that no child should be ‘neglected’ or ‘abandoned’ – but what these terms actually mean is not clarified by the law. What ‘neglect’ and ‘abandonment’ amounts to is uncertain but the assumption is that leaving one’s child in a car unattended falls under this section – and is punishable by law'.

Are you quoting from a Sudocreme blog?

Why?

Just thought it was interesting Sleept. Trying to track down the legality of leaving a child alone in a car. It popped up and referenced the act.

This thread is amusing.
I'm told more accidents happen at home. I post the RoSPA stats that state the opposite. These are slated. I'm told supervising kids makes them depressed. I post a reference to a study that states the opposite. This is not relevant I'm told. I post the law. This is not law I'm told (er it is). I post the NSPCC guidance. This is just guidance I'm told (perhaps but it's from a pretty decent authority on child cruelty and neglect). I post stats on walking to school and how much safer this is with an adult present. These are ignored.
When in doubt the stats are questioned, I am called mad etc. All for believing that young people have the need and the right to be supervised and kept as safe as is humanly possible.

I give up. In the words of Dragon's Den, I'm out.

Ok....

www.sudocrem.co.uk/antiseptic-healing-cream/blog/would-you-leave-your-child-alone-in-the-car/

I'm sure Andrea is a very clever person, but her 2 or 3 lines doesn't in any way actually answer the question of whether leaving a child alone in a car is illegal.

She "assumes" that it is. She then illustrates this assumption with a news story about an actor being chastised by a police officer for leaving his son in the car, but as they seem to have got into a bit of a row and yet the police officer didn't arrest him, it doesn't suggest that it was taken particularly seriously by either parent or officer.

There is no law that says that leaving your child unattended in a car is illegal. It doesn't exist on the statute books as a crime. It comes under the same terms as the leaving them at home scenario, so we're right back where we started.

I applaud your civic mindedness in wanting children to be as safe as humanly possible. I completely disagree however that specifying a set age for when they can be left alone (in a car, at home, wherever) would make any difference to their safety - which has got to be the whole point. Not to make you feel better. To make children safer.

Oh god, you're one of those idiots who drag all the children across the forecourt person aren't you flower?

I expect if you've been googling, you've come across the case of Tim Haines who left his toddler in the car while he ran into the chemist to get her Calpol and was prosecuted by a couple of over-zealous coppers. The case was overturned and he was cleared of all charges. The judge said 'Is this supposed to be a crime?' and threw it out. But that doesn't fit your narrative so you ended up quoting a Sudocrem blog :o

2boys - please stop using passive aggressive smilies. It's really getting on my tits.

frank - you'll be pleased to hear that at my DS's outstanding junior school, parents who accompany the children on school trips aren't CRB checked.

No Odd. I plan ahead and use the pay at the pump ones where I don't need to go inside.

So that's a yes then :o

Tits ? For some reason I thought you were male as I didn't think mothers actually thought/spoke like you bout guess that's not fair on the male population :) :) :)
Think all need chill pill and relax,
Debates are good for the soul,
There will always be a for and an against in any debate!
I can't change my opinions and this has only strengthened my belief ...
I'm out as well flowers :) ;)

Er no Odd. It's an 'I plan ahead and use pay at the pump ones'. Some people really do have difficulty reading English on here don't they?! See my previous post.
Bye all.

there should be some kind of questionnaire with these kind of threads. you have to declare at the start if you leave your child in the car while paying for petrol. it immediately outs all the obsessively paranoid over parenters.
would have saved 700 posts of 'debate'

Flower, because 7 is normal just about everywhere else in the developed world that is not the US, UK, or near a major trunk road.

When in doubt the stats are questioned, I am called mad etc. All for believing that young people have the need and the right to be supervised and kept as safe as is humanly possible.
I keep vowing to leave this thread well alone but...
Young people have the need and right to learn to become independent. This has risks. Supervising them every minute of every day also has risks.

There are dangers involved in daily life, and children and young adults need to learn how to deal with them. Do not wind up the elderly terrier. Stay on the pavement. Be careful which branch you rely on as you climb that tree. Watch it with the knife.

I left my little DC in the car when I paid for petrol. I had the car keys, and I could always see the car the whole time anyway. Pay at the pump did not exist where we lived at the time, and frankly, I never fancied hauling a baby out into ten below: she was better off in the car...

We have so far had four broken bones amongst the DC: fall off bike (under DH's eye) and three fingers (three separate times, netball at school).

Just come back.

I'm aghast and concerned that someone who works with children/teens has such a hysterical view on risk. And struggles with the realities of law and prosecution in real life. Scouring the Web with media filtered accounts to back up.

This does not represent common sense or the people I've worked with (in schools, community centres, play centres, children's centres and mentoring teams) over the years, bar a couple who didn't last long.
All my places of work passed OFSTED and all relevant safety inspections.
As I said up thread ... over 11 the youth is ok for a little while bar sn. And should indeed be able to help themselves.