RISK you take with your children

[mylittleimps]

Xenia said: "Anything can be discussed. Start a risk thread. Namby pamby look after children all the time parents who don't let them go out alone, run in forests, ride horses and risk death damage their children hugely. ", she also said that the case of Madeleine McCann would not change her in as much she would still leave a similar age child alone and go out to dinner in similar circumstances. Xenia also said it was just the same as putting them to bed and going down stairs to have dinner.

i let my young children ride horses, play outside witha river at the bottom of the garden or at their grandparents with a lake. they have lived in a "construction site" since birth, i let them sleep on their fronts BUT i would never ever leave them alone and go out to dinnerb or even leave my rpoperty boundary. and it is not the same putting them to bed and going down stairs.

i believe now the McCanns have pubilically stated that the quilt will never leave them and the poor child is still missing this is a debate that should be had now as if some people can still say it's acceptable is worrying (to me) and I believe children are still at risk if this message is left unchecked

so where fdo you draw the line at risks wrt your children (we all know that as parents we have to take them)

Yes Expat it is. It's on the corner and we're about six houses up. And the garden is 100ft.

What's so unbelievable about that?

I don't think I'm not seeing the point - my point is, the safety angle. My children are actually sometimes less safe potentially when I am in the house with them than when I am not.

And sometimes, when the car is outside, I will clean it, with the front door open adn the kids watching TV in the house. They can see me washing the car from the window and wave at me. And sometimes they come outside to help me. (The car is probably about 15ft from the window btw.) But I am shock horror, outside the house, so they are home alone. Should I be prosecuted? Because that is the point you're all talking about, isn't it?

I am a worrier so I would never ever leave my kids asleep in a hotel room. I don't expect everyone to agree and to be honest I wish I was a bit more laid back. Xenia's point about seriously damaging your kids worries me.

I do think objectively that everything in life is about risk. We make judgements every day and try and mitigate any risk we perceive e.g.

• we do/don't wear seat belts in cars and planes.
• we check use by dates on food
• we do/don't put kids in car seats
• we do/don't eat soft cheese and a host of other things when pg.
• we vaccinate/don't vaccination.
• we do/don't do drugs depending on our perceived risk to ourselves and others
• we allow some people to babysit and not others.
• we do/don't let our young kids into changing rooms on their own.

I could go on. You get the gist. every day we assess the risk and act accordingly. I would never put my kids into a car without a car seat but I know my friends think I am being over protective. In my head I know the chances of having an accident are not that high but etc...

Every-one's perception of risk is different.

'Because that is the point you're all talking about, isn't it? '

Where did I ever state that you should be prosecuted? Or anyone, for that matter?

Get a grip!

I think it is foolish to leave young children alone in the building and then leave that building and its surrounds because it is courting disaster.

I wouldn't do it.

But if you do, go for it.

I can't understand why people who do this get so defensive about their practices - insecurity is my guess.

You wnat to live in a house that's six stories high more power to ya!

mylittleimps "fGS if a baby dies and they discover the mother places him/her on her front to sleep then she would be accused of neglect" - so are you saying that cot death is mainly the fault of the mother? I shall ignore the fact that fathers do not feature in your arguments for now, obviously they don't have any responsibility whatsoever do they? But are you seriously suggesting that if a baby dies in it's sleep whilst on it's front that the mother is at fault?

You also said that you were merely interested and not out to judge, but then you blew that by accusing parents who leave their kids alone for any length of time of neglect. Sounds as though you have a very strong opinion on that. You are not interested in other peoples point of view, you merely want to get your own across in a very forthright manner.

NK4cdb4418X1128a277799 - why the name change? If you believe in your point of view why not use your own posting name?

Toomuchtodo - what I am getting aggressive about and I make no apologies for this, is people thinking they have the right to judge the McCanns and condemn them without knowing all the facts about the case. These parents have lost their daughter, we can only imagine what that must be like, but to have all these strangers condemning you too, that must be unbearable. I simply do not understand why people feel the need to point the finger of blame?

As for the general argument of leaving kids alone it's one I'm not going to get into as I don't feel I have to justify my opinion. You can guess by the way I feel about the McCanns what my stance on that is.

expat tiggiwinkle has said that she thinks there should be legislation so that parents should never be allowed to leave their children in the house on their own (or have I misunderstood you tiggiw?)

I don't have six storeys only 3 (loft conversion). But it's still quicker to get from the postbox than from upstairs, mainly because I'm a bit useless with stairs.

But that's what I'm talking about - if you ahd that rule, you would have really ridiculous prosecutions.

I do think there should be legislation to remove the doubt that obviously exists in some peoples minds as to the dangers in leaving very young children alone. Are there ridiculous prosecutions in the case of the law covering seat belts/car restraints?
I never left my children alone when they were very young (and I have 5 ranging from 26 down to 8 years old)-not even to pop up to the shop 1 minute away at the top of the road. It means putting yourself out a bit sometimes, yes-but that is what being a parent is all about.

Everyones assesment of a risk differs. I would not go gargening at the end of a 100ft garden with my 3 & 5 year olds in the front of the house. I would have them garden too! (i would also like a 100ft garden!!)

If i was walking to the post box i would take them for a walk too. But it is out of sight. If i was posting a letter through the letterbox of the house opposite i might leave them in the living room where we could see each other (never happened so who can say)

But i also lock my front door when i come in and remove the keys to somewhere out of sight. This is mainly to stop them getting out and anyone unwanted getting in.

I don't take my children in pubs, but know people who do. To me they are not places for children. A beer garden in summer perhaps, but not running round in pubs.To me too many risks.

rhubarb, of course I and all the other posters on this thread have the utmost sympathy with the McCanns, no one has said otherwise

but and I'm being truly honest here so this will probably horrify a lot of the MN population, when I see the McCanns on tv, my heart goes out to them, while my head is thinking "why did you leave 3 young kids sleeping in an unlocked room and went out for dinner?"

it's just something I couldn't comprehend or understand

of course what happened to Maddie is totally horrendous and no one on earth ever deserves to suffer like they are suffering

I'd be more scared they'd wake up and be hysterical and come looking for me, rather than thinking they may be abducted, thats why I wouldn't leave kids alone

obviously you don't feel the same as me so we'll have to agree to differ

as I said previously I'm just totally stunned a large number of posters on MN seem to agree with you

LOL you wouldn't like it if you had it, it's a PITA to mow the grass.

That's funny how you say you would post a letter opposite, I wouldn't because it means crossing the road and I have more of a hang up about being run over than being out of site.

No rationale at all, and a perfect illustration of how we all see risks differently.

Tiggi I would be really interested to know at what age you think it acceptable to leave a child alone in the house for 3 minutes?

Sorry mean out of sight

Exactly, our road is nothing, to get to that house is about the same as upstairs in distance. It is just so hard to say in black and white.

But in saying that i would not let my kids play out on it. When i see some of the kids who i know live a couple of street away wondering past our window it sends a shiver down my spine to think of 3 year olds wondering so far from home.

PS I would like a garden that big!!!

not read all of thread but to OP I would definitely personally feel that it is far more dangerous to let children "play outside with a river at the bottom of the garden or at their grandparents with a lake" than to leave them alone in a hotel room. Shudder at the river / lake scenario!

Clearly our risk assessments are very personal and not at all objective

You would be surprised how much can happen in 3 minutes GSS.
I guess it becomes a bit more real if you know of a case where something has happened when children have been left. Some years ago, in this area, a woman left her children alone to pop to the local shop to charge up her electric key meter. Her children were killed in a fire (along with a friend staying the night at the time) which started in the short time she was gone. The children went to my sons school at the time.
Things do happen, however unlikely they may seem. It is just not worth the risk.

What age do you believe should be the legal age where a child is allowed to be left without an adult in the house?

Tiggiwinkle, can you explain what the law that you propose might actually say? What age limit would you impose? And how far away would a parent have to be physically from their child to have contravened the law?

Because most of the posters on here are saying that "it depends on the circumstances". There are relatively few arguing for legislation to clarify what you thought was the existing law.

This isn't a black and white decision such as whether to use a carseat or not, which is a yes/no decision. You leave your children in their bedroom whilst you are downstairs - how many stories away can you be? Can you go into the garden whilst the children are asleep at night? If so how far can you go down the garden.

I don't feel defensive about my decisions at all - as I've posted before on this thread I specifically chose not to take the risk that the McCanns did. But equally I have no problems with leaving my children with a room listening service which other posters want to make illegal! Personally I would defend my freedom against such laws as I have no wish to live ain a nanny state, and I'm participating on this thread to try to explain to the OP why another parent may come to a different conclusion. I am far more worried about fire or water than I am about abduction, and any decision about where I'm staying and whether I leave my children will be focused on those risks and also as to how the children would react if they woke whilst I was out of the room. I personally feel that there are occasions when I can be comfortable with those risks and yet not be in the same room as my sleeping children.

Someone asked about using babysitters. In Mark Warner resorts there are a limited number of potential babysitters (who will only ever be the English speaking, CRB checked "nannies"). It is difficult to get a sitter every evening, and it may even be impossible - I have no idea whether the McCanns tried or not to be honest - I suspect that if I were with 3 other couples then I would have agreed an informal room listening roate where one person visited each room every 10 minutes or so. But as it would be room listening I wouldn't have caught an abduction. I'm not sure whether I would have used a local babysitter who I didn't know unless I found a reputable agency. But I wouldn't judge someone else who did use a local babaysitter - it is their calculated choice.

Is that woman an urban myth btw?

Because I too have heard that story and it was supposed to be in New Cross.

It is not an "urban myth". The childrens funeral cortege went past the school which as I said my one of my sons attended.
To answer the question as to how old, I do not think children under 10 should be left for any length of time as they cannot be held responsible to deal with any misfortune which may happen.

Under 10 eh?

So if their birthday is in August and they have to start going to secondary school in September, they will have to get on a bus by themselves having only ever been left alone in the house a couple of times?

Seriously, do you really think that is sensible? I'm guessing your children are quite young?

(My DS would think I was mad if I told him he was too young to be left by himself while I go to the post btw - I just asked him and he said "but Mummy I'm eight!)

And I have heard of a nurse who went to work for a night shift having left her kids with a baby sitter (18 yr old) for the night. The baby sitter then went out, there was a fire and the children died. She thought she made adequate provision, but with the benefit of hindsight was wrong. Should she be condemned? If a law is introduced to prohibit parents/guardians for leaving children alone in any circumstance and for any length of time, what will be the next step? Will we prosecute parents for employing an inadequate (with benefit of hindsight - few parents would knowingly leave their kids with a dodgy sitter)babysitter? The OP said she was interested in finding out what peoples opinions are. It seems to me that the majority on here are saying that they would not feel very comfortable leaving their children alone, but would not want to dictate to other parents how they should care for their children. There are others saying they might pop to the postbox or let their neighbour listen in with a monitor etc etc. Where is the sense in prosecuting those parents who probably do a damn good job rearing their children, when there is already so many children living in impoverished conditions on every level. I catagorically do not want to live in a Nanny State. I have very strong opinions but I do not like telling other people how to live their lives.

I wondered about the urban myth thing because I've heard it a lot - but the version I heard, it was Christmas and she was away for a couple of hours because the nearest point was Peckham and she lived in New Cross. And the children were young (4 of them under 7 or something).

I don't really think you can compare a couple of hours with a few minutes tbh.

One of the reasons there isn't a law about this and it is left down to the common sense of the parents is because a) the law still presumes common sense (perhaps wrongly in some cases) and b) as Ladymuck points out, you would have to define very tightly the distance, times etc.

plummymummy, I think you can actually be prosecuted for leaving your children in the care of an unfit person.

But the prosecution would have to prove that you knew the person was unfit

You have obviously not read my posts properly GSS.look back and you will see how old my DSs are.
I think as in most things there would be some common sense used in the interpretation of any legislation-you would be unlikely to be prosecuted for leaving your 8 year old to post a letter, but you might be if you left him for four hours while you were elsewhere.
I am sure there are guidelines for the age at which it is considered appropriate to leave a child alone. Is it 12 or is that the age at which you can leave a child in charge of others(ie babysitting)? Does anyone know?

Exactly - that's what I am saying. Most parents would not knowingly leave their children with an unfit person. Would people want to then see a parent prosecuted for neglect if they had made an erroneous decision. How can one human being accurately predict another's actions at any time/in any situation. We can't. It could be argued that leaving a child with a sitter, who later turns out to be abusive or reckless, is more dangerous than leaving the child alone. Where does it end?

Pretty dangerous to expect the government to come up with a common sense caveat with regard to such a ruling. They don't always do common sense well.