shocked - mum left 9 yr old at home on own

[katiekittlemouse]

was at a sports centre today with dd's and shocked to hear that whilst taking her youngest 2 dd's swimming had left the eldest dd who is just 9yrs old at home on her own!!!

I am shocked! would you do that??? I wouldn't for sure!

Why not just tell them not to answer the door?

Well, my dcs have been left alone many times for shorter periods, people have knocked on the door and they have never opened. Sooner or later you realise that you can trust them.

This 'oh I couldn't possibly trust my 9yo to remember instructions, they are so young' isn't just a Western thing. It's an English thing. Scandinavian parents don't have this attitude at all.

Dd's Swedish friends have very similar levels of freedom to what children had in this country 30 years ago. This is not because there are no door-knocking salesmen in Sweden or because fires can't happen there; it's because of different attitudes to what a child can achieve. Dd frequently comments how young her friends here seem compared to her Swedish friends. Having taught university students in both countries, I know what she means.

'The other child can just come to swimming lessons with me, it's tough if they don't like it. '

I think it is totally unfair! I had a big age gap and if one of the little ones had a swimming lesson I took the other little one but I didn't make the older one come. Week after week he would have had to just sit there, he was much happier sitting at home, where he could do his own thing.
He was entirely trustworthy, I told him not to answer the door and I knew he wouldn't answer the door.You have to know your child, leaving a DC with adhd wouldn't be a viable option.
People used to do it when they didn't even have a phone in the home, now that most people have mobile phones you are immediately contactable.
On the whole, if you treat them like unreliable, untrustworthy babies that is what you will get.

Growing up with three brothers, I used to love it when I got a rare on my own in the house. It was my special treat time. Quiet, the music I liked, my special time.

Not surprizingly I agree with AramintaAlice (great post). I think society has changed and we are always worried about 'upsetting' or 'inconveniencing' our children.

I too take the older one out with me if I need to take the little one anywhere - it's tough if she doesn't like it (as it happens she doesn't have a problem with it).

It's also tough if they want to eat chocolate bars just before dinner time, or they don't feel like going to school that day, or maybe later on they want to smoke because some of their friends do it (but that's a whole different can of worms for another thread!)

As parents we're scared to say 'no' to our children - I think that's a shame.

no I think modern day society is too concerned with wrapping children up in cotton wool and allowing them a degree of independence until they HAVE to have independence - and then it comes as a bloody great shock to them when they suddenly have to get themselves to school, cook a meal, do the housework, and generally look after themselves.

As parents we aren't afraid to say no to our children caro (well I'm not) but I won't say no when it isn't neccessary. I don't beleive in insisting on something just because I'm the parent, only if it's important. And I personally don't think this issue is.

Funny because when I was a child I wasn't expected to do anything other than go to school, do my homework and play with friends (lax even by my standards - I would expect more of my DDs).

However, I never had any trouble becomming independent - learning to drive, finding work, living away from parents, all household chores, managing money etc etc. It's not rocket science.

Carofrom, those of us who leave a 9yo in the house for half an hour are not necessarily afraid of saying no to our children when it matters. I am totally happy about denying my ds a chocolate bar. I just think there are times when he could be better employed doing his maths homework than trailing after me round the COOP.

Surely the way society has changed in this particularly area is that parents are far more likely to drag their children around with them everywhere? Thirty years ago, most of my friends' parents would have thought it odd to drag a pre-teen to the post office with them because they can't be relied on to stay at home.

Plenty of time for homework and trailing round the supermarket. Sorry - have to go to work now - not bailing out!

When I was a child I was allowed to roam around the small town where we lived. By the time I was a young teen I could go swimming alone with my friends, take the boat out (once I had satisfied my parents I could handle it), cycle to school, cook Sunday dinner unsupervised and a whole load of other things. By the time my older brother was a teen, he looked after us one evening a week while my parents went on a course: I remember magical evenings with games and hide and seek and secrets.

It was a wonderful childhood- and pretty well identical to what my nephews and nieces in Sweden are still having in this day and age. I hate the thought that I could have missed out on all those memories.

It was not because my parents were lax or afraid of denying me things: but they had a lot of trust in me and looking back I still think that trust was justified. My childhood was full of adventure.

Seeker, lol, what if the european salesman doesn't let her close the door?

My husband and I actually laughed aloud at your naivety

If keeping my children safe means that someone like you classifies them as pampered little princesses and princes, sobeit.

My older 3, 18,17 and 15 feel that I had the balance just right with them.

The oldest is just starting at University now ans doesn't feel that he was disadvantaged in any way by my not leaving him alone until he was about ummm...12 I'd say.

Your choice is to given your children responsibility at 9 or younger and mine is to wait until I feel they can cope with that.

I would also add that I rarely left them alone even at 12, the need never seemed to arise. If I took others to swimming lessons etc the olders would just have to tag along. They didn't really object, knowing I wouldn't have given in. The older 3 are all fairly opinionated teenagers now, so I don't feel that they were overprotected in any way.

ALl that says araminata is that your and your DH are quite rude and insulting

Caro, I was so glad that you brought up that point. The first thing my hub said when he read the posts was that the only reason the parents are so desperate to bestow 'independence' on the is because they're afraid of the tantrum that would follow if they dared to say no.

The whole 'how will they cope' hysteria is unfounded. My olders can all cope perfectly well after being 'wrapped up in cotton wool'. It isn't rocket science as you say. My own parents were restrictive, too much so I'd say, but I still managed to cope with life fairly well .

Many parents that I encounter are far too afraid to tell their children no or to have them inconvenienced in any way and I find that hard to believe. My six year old stared in disbelief last week as she was leaving her friends house and the little girl threw a complete tantrum because she was leaving. The mother clearly was unable to cope and kept saying things like, 'never mind, she can come back next week' etc inbetween rolling her eyes in a 'aren't they little pickles' sort of way at me.

When we got into the car, my daughter burst into laughter at the whole episode, mimicing the inept mothers reaction.

Even she could see how ludicrous it was.

afraid of tantrums??

I was allowed indepdence when I was young - caught buses on my own (and read the timetable myself) but there were times when I didn't want to go somewhere and I knew I had to put up or shut up.

Leaving them alone for short(ish) periods, or letting them go out alone for short tripe occasionaly doesn't have to mean that they don't understand (and accept) that "no" means no

Yes, but why would the child open the door in the first place, Araminta? Mine never have. They know they're not supposed to and they have quite a reasonable sense of self-preservation.

(if someone broke into the house otoh, I would not be able to protect them if I was there: I couldn't fight a grown burglar and wouldn't be fool enough to attempt it)

As I said, I look back on a childhood where a lot of my pleasure came from feeling I could do things on my own. I loved my parents and we had lots of fun together, but I also wanted my independence. Looking back, I think I did deal competently with the situations I was in and it gave me a great sense of adventure and achievement. I can't help seeing that the children I know on the continent still have the same childhood I had.

I know my ds gets pleasure from feeling that he can go to the shop on his own, or mind the house for an hour. It makes him feel grown-up and in charge. He is perfectly ready to cope and he wants to.

Araminta, I think your husband is quite wrong. Let's face it, we are talking about 9yos on this thread, not 2yos. Most 9yos have got over the tantrum age. My ds certainly wouldn't throw a tantrum if I asked him to come to the shops with me; he's not a baby. I just don't see any reason to ask him. If I see a reason to make him do something, I have absolutely no qualms about it. Discipline problems have never been a factor in how we do our parenting: our children will obey when they have to.

I think you will recognise that it was more common 30 years ago to leave a 9yo alone. Does that mean more parents were afraid of tantrums in those days?

I don't mean a tantrum, bad choice of words.

I just mean the general surly argument that follows a parent trying to get a child to do something he or she may prefer not to do.

well my DS2 (at 5yrs old and therefore too young to be left alone) doesn't argue with me when he has to do something he doesn't want to. Yes he grumbles a bit (someties) but he doesn't argue.

And yes - teenagers are a little more argumentative - but they're like that whether you keep them under lock and key or whether you let them roam the streets at will.....because, ermm, they're teenagers

Fair enough, Araminta. I can only repeat that I do not have a problem with making my children obey.

I wasn't suggesting that you do Cory, I just find that that's possible in general, it definitely wasn't meant personally to anyone (if that makes sense).

I just don't see the need to rush our children into being mini adults. I think the 'adultisation' of our kids, the making them feel responsible and grown up, is partly the thing that is responsible for making children feel they can have sex at 13 etc.

My daughter is 15 and tells me that a lot of her friends have been having sex since 13 and most of these girls (the ones that I know) are the ones with the parents who do rush to give their children responsibilities.

I've spent a fair amount of time with my daughter looking at her Bebo/Myspace/Facebook accounts etc (she offers to show me friends, I never demand to see). The thing that strikes me most is the way that most of these children pout and pose for the camera. My daughters best friend even has a 'fuck buddy'.

I honestly believe that all this is brought about by the trend to 'grow up' our children much earlier.

I'm not prepared to subscribe to that. My 10 y/o daughter and 12 y/o son had to delete their Bebo accounts and I wont allow them on msn until they're legally old enough. And possibly not even then.

I did allow the older 3 before 13 and I regret it now.

I know that many of you have teenage children as well as younger ones, like me, and who still don't agree with me but for those who don't yet have teenagers I honestly can't stress enough that from many frank chats with my teenagers I have learned that keeping them children without responsibility for as long as possible is the best thing you can ever do for them.

"My husband and I actually laughed aloud at your naivety"

Well what delightful people that shows you to be!

And I'd love to see the details of all the children who have been abducted/hurt/whatever by people coming to the door to sell cleaning products. It doesn't happen, people!

And I am perfectly happy to say "no" to my children. I do it a lot. I am a strict parent, and I am not at all afraid of upsetting them. If necessary. BUT I see no reason to say "no" for the sake of it. And I consider one of my most important parenting jobs to be building the relationship between my children - and that would not be served by getting my dd to abandon an episode of Friends to accompany her little brother to the swimming pool when she could perfectly well stay home.

But that doesn't make sense Araminta I'm sure most of us posting on this thread were given "freedom" as children - but we didn't all start having sex at 13 or become sexualised because of it. Teenager pregancies should have been rife from 100's of years ago if that were the case..........

I was given STACKS of freedom (I remember going down to the beach from our house which is a good mile away) with my older brother. We moved from that house when I was 5 and he's only 3 1/2yrs older than me.........

I didn't start having sex early or wear "sexy" clothes (still don't do that latter ).

oh god seeker - I'd force my DS's away from friends - much more damaging/boring that watching their younger siblings learning to swim

What has having sex and going on Bebo got to do with leaving your child at home for an hour when they are 9? The two things do not equate. I would strongly discourage the first two.