Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 21
  1. #1 Parents investigated for neglect after letting kids walk home alone 
    Power CUer
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    24,867
    Yet another one of these. We walked more than a mile as kids to the shopping center and back. (And we didn't have to carry a damned card!) I don't understand why this has suddenly become "child abuse" and gives CPS the right to bully these parents and question the children at school without parental notification.

    Parents investigated for neglect after letting kids walk home alone
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/...d=pm_local_pop

    It was a one-mile walk home from a Silver Spring park on Georgia Avenue on a Saturday afternoon. But what the parents saw as a moment of independence for their 10-year-old son and 6-year-old daughter, they say authorities viewed much differently.

    Danielle and Alexander Meitiv say they are being investigated for neglect for the Dec. 20 trek ...

    ...She said her son and daughter have previously paired up for walks around the block, to a nearby 7-Eleven and to a library about three-quarters of a mile away. “They have proven they are responsible,” she said. “They’ve developed these skills.”

    ...On Dec. 20, Alexander agreed to let the children, Rafi and Dvora, walk from Woodside Park to their home, a mile south, in an area the family says the children know well.

    The children made it about halfway.

    Police picked up the children near the Discovery building, the family said, after someone reported seeing them.

    Police on Wednesday did not immediately have information on the case. But a spokeswoman said that when concerns are reported, “we have a responsibility as part of our duty to check on people’s welfare.”

    The Meitivs say their son told police that he and his sister were not doing anything illegal and are allowed to walk. Usually, their mother said, the children carry a laminated card with parent contact information that says: “I am not lost. I am a free-range kid.” The kids didn’t have the card that day....

    ...The Meitivs say that on Dec. 20, a CPS worker required Alexander to sign a safety plan pledging he would not leave his children unsupervised until the following Monday, when CPS would follow up. At first he refused, saying he needed to talk to a lawyer, his wife said, but changed his mind when he was told his children would be removed if he did not comply.

    Following the holidays, the family said, CPS called again, saying the agency needed to inquire further and visit the family’s home. Danielle said she resisted.

    “It seemed such a huge violation of privacy to examine my house because my kids were walking home,” she said.

    This week, a CPS social worker showed up at her door, she said. She did not let him in. She said she was stunned to later learn from the principal that her children were interviewed at school.

    The family has a meeting set for next week at CPS offices in Rockville....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Senior Member Apache's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Tree rats are watching you
    Posts
    7,784
    They're too young to be without their parents... so far from home.



    Because I SAY they are!!!!!



    Damned Nanny-statists.....grrrr
    Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem.
    Ronald Reagan

    We could say they are spending like drunken sailors. That would be unfair to drunken sailors, they're spending their OWN money.
    Ronald Reagan

    R.I.P. Crockspot
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Power CUer
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    24,867
    The state really wants to raise children in a straightjacket.

    Meanwhile, how many stories have we heard of truly abusive parents killing their children and CPS, though called, never acted?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Power CUer noonwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Warren, MI
    Posts
    21,037
    It's okay to give a 10 year old a mile radius for wandering. It's not okay for a 6 year old, and it's not okay to make a 10 year old responsible for the well-being of a 6 year old.


    It's also not a matter for CPS or police intervention, unless the kids are having problems or causing problems.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Power CUer
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    24,867
    Quote Originally Posted by noonwitch View Post
    It's okay to give a 10 year old a mile radius for wandering. It's not okay for a 6 year old, and it's not okay to make a 10 year old responsible for the well-being of a 6 year old.


    It's also not a matter for CPS or police intervention, unless the kids are having problems or causing problems.
    This is one area where I'd have to disagree, though it is only based on my own experience and life may be different today.

    When I was a child, I lived in a city, with concrete blocks, row houses, and a large pike bisecting our section of the city. All the stores were along the pike. There were many children in my family and we oldest ones often ran errands up to the pike, usually to the drug store (there was always one kid who was sick with something). Back in those days, you could go into the drug store and the druggist would hand you the prescription to bring to your mom. We were 5 and 7 and the walk was at least half a mile. For our troubles, we got 10 cents to buy candy. (You could buy a whole candy bar for 10 cents then).

    For school, we walked down the pike in the other direction: another at least half to 3/4 mile. On our way to school, we walked with all the neighborhood kids. However, different schools got out at different times and I remember walking home alone many days. I never thought anything about it. I always knew that if I got lost, I could go to a neighbor's house, state my phone number, and she would call my mom. Nothing like that ever happened but we were drilled on our phone number.

    Back in those days, women were not working outside the home. I think that may have been the main difference: you could always count on someone's mom being home. Men were at work, so if you saw a working-age man walking around during the day (and he wasn't a cop, a crossing guard, or wearing some kind of uniform), you sensed it could be dangerous and stayed away from him.

    No harm came to us, but we were taught to be careful from a young age. It was also the city and everyone walked. It wasn't unusual to see unaccompanied kids walking places.

    When we moved to the suburbs, we continued to walk, even though everyone else drove. I remember being 10 and walking, with a younger sibling, a mile to the local 5 and 10. The rule was to call when we got there (a phone call was a dime) and to call when we were leaving. We also walked to the swimming pool and walked home from school. The swimming pool was a good deal more than a mile. The school was about a mile.

    I feel sorry for these kids today who don't know what it's like to get somewhere on their own steam. Our independence was developed early and has translated into a lot of other areas of life. I imagine that for today's children, dependence is a more natural way for them to live.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Power CUer noonwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Warren, MI
    Posts
    21,037
    I grew up in a suburb-when I was 7-10 years old (3rd to 5th grade), I had a square mile to roam, the boundaries being the 4 main streets that marked the neighborhood. I could walk or ride my bike anywhere in that range-all my friends lived in the area, there was a park, a pool, two elementary school playgrounds and a middle school that had baseball fields and tennis courts.

    When I was a little older, my roaming range was expanded to include other neighborhoods, but I wasn't allowed to go to Jaycee Park, because that was where all the potheads hung out.

    The library was just outside of the radius, but I had permission to go there because there was a safety crosswalk in front of it.


    It's a parenting decision, to decide when your kid is ready to handle what level of freedom. As someone who works in CFS, this type of case would irritate me to no end, because it's not really a matter for us or the police to handle. But I don't think it's fair to make a 10 year old responsible for a 6 year old sibling.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    Ancient Fire Breather Retread's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    I came to Texas as soon as I could
    Posts
    19,250
    Editorial: Uncle Sam, don’t mother-hen free-range parents

    Parenting is the ultimate do-it-yourself project. Children come with no instruction booklet and “much assembly required.”

    Two of the most important virtues we bequeath to our kids are self-reliance and good decision-making. There isn’t any governmental bubble wrap that can replace these two protections.

    Yet in recent months we’ve seen multiple cases of Mom’s guiding hand getting slapped away by Uncle Sam’s intrusion.

    In July, a Florida mom was arrested for letting her 7-year-old walk alone to a nearby playground.

    In September, children’s book author Kari Anne Roy had a lot of explaining to do when she let her 6-year-old son play, unsupervised, on a park bench 150 yards from her Austin house.

    Every parent’s worst nightmare is a child not making it home when expected, and on Dec. 20, Danielle and Alexander Meitiv’s children did not.

    Halfway back to their suburban Silver Spring, Md., residence, after playing in the neighborhood park, the Meitivs’ 10-year-old son and 6-year-old daughter were scooped up. Not by a menacing stranger. By police.

    The children are back home, but the family is awaiting a follow-up visit from Child Protective Services.

    The Meitivs are well-educated professionals with a parenting philosophy that makes some folks itchy: They subscribe to the “free-range kids” movement. The Meitiv children had been gradually expanding their independence zone, walking around the block, then to a convenience store and more recently to a library about three-quarters of a mile away.

    Society’s overarching message in regard to children — and a justifiable one — is don’t look the other way when something doesn’t seem right.

    But Danielle and Alexander quickly established themselves to be caring, even conservative, parents, and their children have clear and healthy rules in regard to bedtime, TV and meals. And yet they are now under the CPS umbrella of suspicion.

    CPS is legally prohibited from saying much about open investigations, so the public is mostly hearing only one side of the story. But barring some unlikely detail, this case — like the previous ones — seems an overreach and overreaction. Handcuffing a parent’s right to parent is more negligent than permitting a 150-yard or 1-mile stroll.

    The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children says that only one-hundreth of 1 percent of missing children are abducted by strangers or slight acquaintances. Statistics on child abuse, often deadly, indicate that Maryland has plenty of real protecting to be done on behalf of its tiniest citizens.

    With these recent stories, it’s no wonder that some parents are more concerned that their decisions will get reported to police than they are that anything bad will happen to their child.

    We might not have made the choice the Meitivs did, but we believe the parental choice is theirs, not some crazy Uncle’s.
    It's not how old you are, it's how you got here.
    It's been a long road and not all of it was paved.
    . If you ain't havin' fun, it's your own damn fault
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    Power CUer
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    24,867
    Handcuffing a parent’s right to parent is more negligent than permitting a 150-yard or 1-mile stroll.
    EXACTLY.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    Ancient Fire Breather Retread's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    I came to Texas as soon as I could
    Posts
    19,250
    Free-range parents found responsible for ‘unsubstantiated’ child neglect

    The Maryland parents investigated for letting their young children walk home by themselves from a park were found responsible for “unsubstantiated” child neglect in a decision that has not fully resolved their clash with authorities over questions of parenting and children’s safety.

    Danielle and Alexander Meitiv hoped the nationally debated case — which has lit up social media and brought a dozen television film crews to their Silver Spring home — would be dismissed after a two-month investigation by Montgomery County Child Protective Services.

    But the finding of unsubstantiated child neglect means CPS will keep a file on the family for at least five years and leaves open the question of what would happen if the Meitiv children get reported again for walking without adult supervision.
    It's not how old you are, it's how you got here.
    It's been a long road and not all of it was paved.
    . If you ain't havin' fun, it's your own damn fault
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    Senior Member Dori's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Blue State Hell
    Posts
    4,032
    Idiots. Are they going to start picking up kids for walking to and from school too?
    Obama isn't the problem. The problem is an electorate that would vote a man like him into office.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •