Is it possible to still have a "Huckleberry Finn" childhood?

[EddieIzzardismyhero]

Have just finished reading "21st Century Boys" and found it a very interesting, if somewhat depressing read.

I have two sons, both under two at the moment so this is not something pressing. But I found myself musing on the type of childhood I would be able to offer them in comparison to the one I enjoyed myself.

I was brought up in the 70s in a small town in the west country and I remember long sunny days spent exploring the local fields and forests, hours spent playing out without adult supervision, running out of the house first thing in the morning and coming back only when you were hungry . . . Does this still exist anywhere in this country anymore?

We live in a market town in the SE of England. We live in a cul-de-sac but rarely see children playing out, partly because moronic drivers race up and down the road as if they're competing in F1 . We have lots of parks and open spaces but children are rarely unsupervised.

I would love to give my boys the kind of childhood I enjoyed but is it possible now? Does anyone else do it? Would I be on my own (and hence my children would be on their own too)?

Interested in your thoughts.

I am lucky to live in a street where a lot of our neighbours have children the same age. We live in fairly small terraced houses, and the area is known for having people moving to it who are interested in living in a community. This started by one community-minded mother at the end of the 1960s almost recruiting friends to move to her street and starting holding street parties. It does work out that parents look out for each other's children - the children (who are still small - between four and seven years) go and play in someone else's garden with fairly free rein. We all have the same rule that the children should tell their parents where they're going. I think what makes it work is that everyone overlooks everyone else's garden and the path behind the gardens - not a lot could happen without an adult noticing and the adults are all close friends. The street (i.e. the actual road where the cars drive) spends most of the time acting as a badminton court for adults and their older children so cars cannot drive along it without stopping and waiting for the "pedestrians" (badminton players?!) to get out of the way - which makes the road much safer. It's not exactly a wilderness, but we have woods nearby and I think as the children get older, the network that we've built up and the children's feeling of self-confidence and our trust in our children as a group, should make forays into the woods feasible. We'll have to see.
I wonder though if holidays are the time and place for real freedom - camping or renting a holiday house in the middle of the countryside sounds like the best possibility for real adventure.
I spent my childhood in a very middle class area where none of the children knew each other. That meant that we didn't have the effect of safety in numbers and we just spent time playing by ourselves (or with children who we had invited round two weeks before) in our garden surrounded by very high hedges. So, I think my children have it better!

Ok I would love a rye harbour/punchbowl farm childhood for my children. Their parents very obviously did care. Tamzin had a great relationship with hers but she also got to go camping for days on end, riding and sailing everyday and do what they wanted within reason during the holidays.
I remember roaming on my bike for whole days only coming back for food.

Why has it changed? Do we en masse need to agreed to let our children out so that they can again do it. Everyones scared to because they're on their own. Maybe I'm lucky I'll be able to send my 4 out together so automatically have a group of them.

Did anyone see when they talked about freedom on chilf of our time (think it was last year) only one child went out exploring.

simic, that's interesting - sounds lovely . I didn't grow up in an esp middle class area and everyone just opened their doors, let their kids out and we all mixed. It was great.

bronze, what you say about all parents agreeing to let their children out is exactly what Sue Palmer suggests - there is definitely safety in numbers and until some parents start breaking the mould no one else will join in. She also argues for more tolerance amongst communities for children's noise - obviously I'm not talking about noise late at night, or balls being kicked deliberately into windows, etc, but just general "children playing" noise.

Our street must have got pretty noisy at times but I don't remember anyone complaining cos that's just what happened then.

We're all moving there simic!

I want this for my children too. I want them to grow into independent, resourceful people, who are able to amuse themselves and get lots of fresh air. I am fortunate enough to live in a rural area where there trees to climb, take picnics etc but I am concerned that, when the time comes (they're only 1 and 2 at the mo), my fear of 'stranger danger' or the fact that none of their friends will be allowed out will put the kybosh (?sp) on it. It's what I'm aiming for though.

interesting question...I live in a small village in the Peak District and whilst it's not quite HF (focusing only on the positive aspects of HF, not the negative ones pointed out by some) there are aspects of their life that aren;t far off. dds (10 and 8) are allowed to walk the dog on their own and play in the fields on their own. the family across the road - kids aged 12, 10 and 8 are the same. the other day I was walking through the village and two (primary school age) lads were playing with boats in the stream. one in just his underpants.
I have no qualms at all about lettings dds play out. I trust them to be sensible. I give them a phone for emergencies.

My position on all this relates to the way in which I measure risk. for me there are four things to take into account:

• The possible negative outcome of doing something (the possible negative outcome of letting them play out being injury or abduction)
• the possible negative outcome of not doing it (the possible negative outcome of not letting them play out is that they miss out on all this, they are late in developing their own risk assessment skills and independence)
• and the likelihood of each of these negative outcomes - the first being extremely unlikely; the second being almost certain.

so it's a no brainer. I think lots of people fail to take into account the negative outcome of not doing these things. and I think that's a great shame.

Ediie- Think I may have to get hold of that book.

I live rurally but near a very very busy main road. It is supposed to be 30 through the village but most do about 50. That road scares the hell out of me ont he school walk let alone letting the children roam. They will be fine to stay this side of it though.
This freedom to roam thing is actually one of the factors that I'm considering in what we are looking for in a new house

bronze - we too have a busy road - it's the one danger. fortunately there's an underpass at one stage, and also a pedestrian crossing, and most of the village is on one side of it (except for the sweet shop and the school...)

hatwoman, that's a v interesting theory - and I hope I feel the same way when my DC are old enough to go out. To me the abduction risk is very very small, the big risk is traffic. Cars and children just don't mix and many motorists (fuelled by the likes of Clarkson) think it's their god-given right to drive at whatever speed they chooose. I don't know how I'd live with myself if I decided to take that risk on their behalf and either one of them was to get injured or worse on the road .

bronze, it's a very interesting book - there is one about girls too apprently although, for obvious reasons, I haven't read it!

I've just ordered the book. It sound very interesting and 3 of my lot are boys.

The park and rec are the other side to us. not so good.
It would be nice if the adults in this society took a bit more responsibility. There are school signs, children about signs not to mention speed limit but they care more about getting to where they want to go fast.
I think the other problem is how parents used to look out for other peoples children. Now you don't even dare look at another persons child incase their parents come battering on your door accusing you of something.
We complain that children are lazier these days and all they want is screens but the real problem is with the adults.

bronze, I completely agree with you about the problem with not being able to look out for others' kid - the old saying "it takes a village to raise a child" is still valid but no longer applicable and children are losing out a lot on a lack of contact with their community and of people of different ages.

There is so much suspicion and mistrust, and so much aggression towards each other.

God knows how we stem the tide though .

Sorry, that sounded really depressing! It wasn't meant to be .

I'm reading 'Last Child in the Woods' by Richard Louv at the moment and it too makes rather depressing reading.

I was at a garden design course presentation this morning (the students were using my garden as a project) and one of the designers suggested planting blackberries. The course tutor questioned the 'safety aspects' of having blackberries in a garden with children, and that she should have chosen a thornless variety. She looked slightly bemused and said 'Well, I did consider it, but really, how dangerous is a balckberry?'. She's quite right. A garden with no prickles, no water features, no slippery bits etc etc, and that's before we even get out into 'wild' unsupervised areas. Heavens, when we were kids, building sites were the best playgrounds ever - we used to hide in the drains. Can you imagine even getting onto a building site these days without a risk assessment, a hard hat and a high-vis jacket?

Stop suggesting books will you

midnightexpress - a lovely swallows and amazons childhood is one thing but lethal building sites are quite another...no I cant imagine getting onto one without all those h&s things as builders are killed on them everyday because of costcutting.

[gets off hobbyhorse]

oh and the mere mention of huck finn scares me shitless - the tarring and feathering...[shivers]

You can here, but I live in a little village in Switzerland. The kids next door can often be found shooting home made bow and arrows (sometimes quite buttock-clenchingly close to our car.....) and kids walk to school by themselves at 6!!!!! The police come into the preschools and teach them how to cross the road properly when they're three or four!

Well DD will be walking "by herself" with me in disguise about 20 feet behind You can take the girl out of North London......

Don't forget that back in the 70's when we were kids the incidence of children killed or disabled in road accidents was higher than it is now (even though there are far more cars on the road now). Don't you remember all those dodgy road safety adds (with Kevin Keegan ).

It is quite possible for kids to have outdoor adventures without getting run over, but you have to take them places(the park, beach, woods, rivers etc). You don't have to stand over them, sit down with a book and a flask of coffee and let them roam .

I have long lamented the loss of free-range childhoods; I'm convinced it's bad for growing brains to grow up otherwise. I give DC more freedoms than average (and have taken flack for it, too ).

For us, Bad: DS10yo played 6 hours of computer games today (he won't be on again until Saturday, though).

Good: DS10yo, DD8yo & DS5yo all cycled up and down the lane today for a while we live on the edge of a rural town and then cycled to DS1's "den": a dugout under a tree on the edge of local field, about 200m away. Farmer was irrigating the other field out front & I half-thought we might get a knock on the door to complain about DC presence on private land... but thank goodness no. DC are out front running up and down the verges as I type.

I did walk down to remind them to keep off the crop itself .

There's a gang of local boys age 8+ who play out independently very regularly over a pretty large area, in the bushes and fields a lot.

lljkk, who have you taken flak from?

I agree it's bad for growing brains to be inside and/or constantly supervised.

Love the idea of an outdoor den .

scatty, I didn't know that - interesting and sobering thought.

Although, having thought about it, it makes sense doesn't it? After all, children don't get to cross the road independently anymore so they won't get hurt.

It's such a delicate balance.

I know a large family who live on an scottish Island close to the sea surrounded by countryside and animals. They kids are allowed to freely rome their surrounding and go rock pooling taking a mobile phone so they are reachable and their friend with a house almost on the beach keeps an eye out for them. They have loads of pets and some farm animals with a massive garden to play in all day and can be as load at they like due to no neighbors.
They can also afford a fairly large house due to low house costs so everyone has space they even have a craft room dedicate to the kids paintings and crafting. It even has a view of the sea.

It's truly idilic not sure if I could quite let go and let my kids free range like that but wow I would have loved it if I were 10 years old.

The village my parents live in hasn't changed since I was a child living there and my children are still enjoying the things I enjoyed there.

It is a very rural village where there are only around 8 children so everyone knows everyone, my parents live opposite the village green so dd1 and dd2 are allowed to play on the swings and slide alone whilst I supervise from the window, they are not near the road and are safe.

When they are older (11ish) they will be able to visit the ford unsupervised but until then we all go as a family for a paddle, we gave been today and the children enjoy looking for fish, swimming and running around freely.

The village we live in is rural but quite a lot bigger and has a busier road running through it so dd1 and dd2 are only allowed to play in our close with the neighbour hood children, I've said perhaps dd1 will be able to venture to the playground next year as the playground is a bit out of the way and across the busy road, she is road aware as we walk to and from school every day but i think i'm being a bit pfb about it!

I live on a farm. DD is 3 and roams pretty freely through the fields out back (I watch her or go with her and she knows not to go further than the copse). Her cousins come over and they go frogspawn collecting and on bug hunts. The farmer waves from the tractor and sometimes lets her ride in his trailer. We grow veg and go walking, paddle in the stream, get our water from a natural spring under the farm and I don't drive but cycle if we need to go anywhere. It's pretty lovely. I'm hoping dd has a childhood of dens and roaming like I did.

thediary, it sounds amazing but I bet you'd be bored as a teenager!

4andnotout, so some of these places do still exist. Maybe we need to move!

It's a work of fiction whose primary purpose was a vehicle to thinly disguise Samuel Clements' abolitionism.

And the setting was about 150 years ago.

Not likely that type of childhood ever existed considering that, other than our own and the baby boomer generation, many children had serious responsibilities even in childhood and were considered adults as late or even mid-teens.

The Scottish idyll fantasy also has high levels of alcoholism, suicide and deprivation to go with them, as well as most of the time having to home school or board at secondary schools are scarce.