Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Do We Judge Parents for Putting Kids at Perceived But Unreal Risk?

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 280 posts

Re: Why Do We Judge Parents for Putting Kids at Perceived But Unreal Risk?

#91

Post by SilasX »

dragonwriter wrote: post #64
SilasX wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, but I think this is making the same errors in the opposite direction. 1) Yes, child abduction/predation is unlikely ... because we've adopted a huge number of countermeasures that close of this vector. That doesn't (by itself) mean you can just stop doing those measures and act like the risk is still low. 2) The risk of death by bathtub is not 75%. 3) Terrorists ramp up efforts against any vector they've f…

> Yes, child abduction/predation is unlikely ... because we've adopted a huge number of countermeasures that close of this vector. Actually, most of the social "countermeasures" were adopted after high-profile single incidents in the 1990s (perhaps largely because the larger 1960s-1980s crime wave that had been the pretext for expanding government powers in the law enforcement arena previously was ending, and a new p…

The problem in claiming "the evidence says..." in cases like this is that the body of potential perpetrators is intelligent and adaptive.

Say someone cracks a major bank account by guessing "password" as the password. The bank changes the password.

I claim that the weak password was a security risk, and changing it was the right response.

Someone comes a long and gives me a data-intense lecture about "well, electronic bank theft was already declining, and it accounts for only a tiny fraction of financial losses, so changing the password was a waste of time, and was in the context of the IT department using a bunch of pretexts to order people around".

How would you refute that, given all the evidence on their side?

Re: Why Do We Judge Parents for Putting Kids at Perceived But Unreal Risk?

#92

Post by softawre »

harryh wrote: post #85
rdtsc wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One would think, but seeing what happened to my co-worker, I don't want to go through that.

A couple of very slightly uncomfortable conversations seems like a small price to pay for raising your kids in the manner you deem appropriate.

And you are free to raise your kids how you wish.

Re: Why Do We Judge Parents for Putting Kids at Perceived But Unreal Risk?

#93

Post by cmdrfred »

astrodust wrote: post #12
DougN7 wrote: post #2

What's the difference between perceived and real? Someone preceiving it thinks it's plenty real. I've never been in a traffic accident - is the need for seat belts and air bags real?

Here's an interesting survey you can do to see how the statistics work. Ask people you know if they know anyone who's been involved in a plane crash, however minor. Most people are at least two degrees away from such an event even if they know a lot of people. It's rare to know someone who knows someone who's been involved in a plane crash because as traumatic as these events are, they impact a very small number of p…

Also airbags and seat belts don't do much to restrict your personal liberty. Kids walking around and exploring their local environment is a safe and I believe necessary activity if you want to raise a well rounded independent child. Notice the recent trend of the nearly thirty somethings still living at home? I postulate they might of grown up too "safe".

Re: Why Do We Judge Parents for Putting Kids at Perceived But Unreal Risk?

#94

Post by fireflash38 »

djsumdog wrote: post #22
larrik wrote: post #18

> A 2-year-old was found unattended after his parents allegedly left home to play Pokémon Go. > How much risk was there of some harm coming to the child while the parents were gone? As a parent to young children, I would say pretty damn high, actually. Kids do stupid things all the time, and if you aren't there, and they know you aren't there, there is no limit to the stupid things a 2 year old can do. It's a normal…

I could see that. A two year old could easily run out into traffic. A 7 or 8 year old, not so much. I remember years ago about a women who had the police escort a kid to her house because she'd let him bicycle to school (wearing a helmet and it was < 2 miles). That is kinda crazy. When I went to elementary school (early 90s), there was a whole group of kids who walked to school. Sometimes the teacher in charge of the…

> A two year old could easily run out into traffic. A 7 or 8 year old, not so much.

You overestimate 7 & 8 year olds. I know I definitely did. Ran into the side of a moving car.

Re: Why Do We Judge Parents for Putting Kids at Perceived But Unreal Risk?

#95

Post by adrusi »

gph wrote: post #32

I understand the overall thrust of this article, but I somewhat disagree with the suggestion that my judgement of morality should have no impact on my judgement of the risk to a child. For instance a parent that would leave a 2-year old alone to go play pokemon probably has other terrible parenting judgement/skills and most likely the environment they leave the kid in IS actually more dangerous than someone who accid…

You're absolutely right that you can sometimes take a parent's willingness to leave a young child unsupervised as an indication of worse general parenting, but the problem I have with your statement is that I don't think that indication is enough to draw any conclusions from. There are other reasons that a parent might leave their child unsupervised and you have to give them the benefit of the doubt that their reason is o e of those. Benefit of the doubt doesn't mean that you can't keep an eye out for other signs that theyre inadequate parents, or even that you can't go out of your way to investigate, but drawing those conclusions prematurely contributes to, and might even be the driving cause of the trend towards the oppression of children that we see today.

Maybe you agree with this already, but it wasn't clear in your comment.

Re: Why Do We Judge Parents for Putting Kids at Perceived But Unreal Risk?

#96

Post by blister »

djsumdog wrote: post #22
larrik wrote: post #18

> A 2-year-old was found unattended after his parents allegedly left home to play Pokémon Go. > How much risk was there of some harm coming to the child while the parents were gone? As a parent to young children, I would say pretty damn high, actually. Kids do stupid things all the time, and if you aren't there, and they know you aren't there, there is no limit to the stupid things a 2 year old can do. It's a normal…

I could see that. A two year old could easily run out into traffic. A 7 or 8 year old, not so much. I remember years ago about a women who had the police escort a kid to her house because she'd let him bicycle to school (wearing a helmet and it was < 2 miles). That is kinda crazy. When I went to elementary school (early 90s), there was a whole group of kids who walked to school. Sometimes the teacher in charge of the…

Shit man, I'm WAY more scared of my kids running out into traffic. My 8 year old son is completely oblivious to the world around him. Just this morning he chased a tennis ball right into the middle of a three-way intersection without even looking.

My daughter is much better (at 7). Kids are all crazy.

Re: Why Do We Judge Parents for Putting Kids at Perceived But Unreal Risk?

#97

Post by softawre »

nostromo wrote: post #20

The same is true for terrorism of course. Terrorism catches our attention because it's morally outrageous, not because it's statistically dangerous to people in Western countries. But if you talk with "regular people", you'll notice that media coverage gives people an unwarranted fear of outlier events: terrorism, mass shootings, plane crashes, etc. In reality, almost everyone in the US should fear the real killers:…

Well said.

In fact, I would not be surprised if people were so stressed out about these rare things they can not control that they developed habits like binge eating, drinking, and smoking - that had a much higher chance of leading to their early demise.

Re: Why Do We Judge Parents for Putting Kids at Perceived But Unreal Risk?

#98

Post by jpna66dd »

rdtsc wrote: post #77

Even since I was 10 or so I would often come back to school on my own. Then let myself into our apartment. Eat some lunch, do homework, play until my parents came home in the evening. I was effectively often alone for about 4 or so hours. I wouldn't let my kid do it here in US. Not because I wouldn't trust them or think it is dangerous. But because I am afraid what neighbors, school, CPS would do. My co-worker let hi…

Hence the power of giving cookies, serving beers and inviting your neighbours to a meal/barbecues when you arrive in a new place. It's a lot harder to call the police when they see your children and share your food.

And yes, there may be the crazy one that will still call them, but the neighbourhood will agree _he_ is the crazy one.

Re: Why Do We Judge Parents for Putting Kids at Perceived But Unreal Risk?

#99

Post by jkeel »

harryh wrote: post #81
rdtsc wrote: post #77

Even since I was 10 or so I would often come back to school on my own. Then let myself into our apartment. Eat some lunch, do homework, play until my parents came home in the evening. I was effectively often alone for about 4 or so hours. I wouldn't let my kid do it here in US. Not because I wouldn't trust them or think it is dangerous. But because I am afraid what neighbors, school, CPS would do. My co-worker let hi…

But because I am afraid what neighbors, school, CPS would do. Speaking of "perceived but unreal risk"....

Except I'm not sure this is an "unreal" risk. I was telling someone a story today about how I was outside with my daughter who was 10 at the time. We live in cul-de-sac and 2 houses down there is a neighborhood pool but across the street (very non-busy street). The neighborhood has some unused wood from building a fence and sent an email out saying that people could take some. My daughter said she wanted to take a wagon and go get some to make a project. I encouraged her to go alone but I'd watch from the front of the house, but next to the road (I'm literally 2 houses away). I actually thought it would be good for her to do it alone (with me watching). I watch as she looks both ways before crossing and being very careful of her surroundings, etc.

Then all of a sudden the teenage boy (about 15-16 years old) runs out of the house over to her and starts talking to her. The mother runs out soon after. I walk over there and they are talking to her and looking concerned at me. I walk up and the mom is yelling at me about letting my daughter outside alone. I explain to her that I was here the whole time watching. She then says that some stranger could have come up to her in which I reply, "I know. It's a good thing I was here."

My daughter said she was afraid to go in the front yard after that because she said the creepy neighbors are probably watching her. Thank goodness they moved away a few months ago.

Re: Why Do We Judge Parents for Putting Kids at Perceived But Unreal Risk?

#100

Post by gambiting »

fireflash38 wrote: post #94
djsumdog wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could see that. A two year old could easily run out into traffic. A 7 or 8 year old, not so much. I remember years ago about a women who had the police escort a kid to her house because she'd let him bicycle to school (wearing a helmet and it was < 2 miles). That is kinda crazy. When I went to elementary school (early 90s), there was a whole group of kids who walked to school. Sometimes the teacher in charge of the…

> A two year old could easily run out into traffic. A 7 or 8 year old, not so much. You overestimate 7 & 8 year olds. I know I definitely did. Ran into the side of a moving car.

I used to walk to school all by myself when I was 7 - I had to lock the door behind me, cross two roads to get to school, come back, let myself in, and have a fruit or a sandwich while I waited for my parents to come back. That was in 1998. Everyone walked to school - maybe one kid got dropped off by his parents but he was from a "rich" family and no one liked him because of it.
Post reply on HN