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

How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

freerangekids.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 534 posts

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#191

Post by jimmaswell »

robbrown451 wrote: post #181
jimmaswell wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has anyone considered that, like many things, maybe childraising knowledge has improved over time, and maybe it is true that it's dangerous and a bad idea to let them roam around far away unsupervised? It always seemed reasonable to me, even when I was that age myself. An anecdote is that the only bone injury I had as a kid resulted from riding bikes with some other kids who had a "fun idea" of biking down this steep…

"My proposed alternative is good video games with open exploration" I don't even know what to say to that. Seriously?

I never really liked outside much as a kid and found those kinds of games a lot more fun and "adventurous" than outside. To recall my exact feelings at the time, in Spyro I was working towards goals and finding cool stuff like fairies and treasure, while trees and rocks outside were just "there." Nowadays I can appreciate nature just fine (lately I watched a particular great blue heron occasionally throughout a semester that hangs around campus waiting to see if I could watch it catch a fish from the pond and it eventually did, cool thing to see) but at the time it kind of felt like a chore having to go outside. In addition to satisfying the criteria of exploration, I think the right kinds of video games are very beneficial with regards to reading/coordination/other skills at a young age, like with my reading anecdote, but I haven't read any actual studies on it. For stuff like building treehouses and other more creative ventures there's Minecraft et al. All without losing real limbs, falling down real wells, or getting stung by real bees a real mile from home and learning you have a real bee allergy.

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#192

Post by losteric »

jimmaswell wrote: post #80
FrancoDiaz wrote: post #10

I have a 4 year old, in my mid 40s, and think about this a lot for some reason. In the 70s during the summer, when I was around 7, we would wake up, eat breakfast, go out and about wherever we wanted, come back for lunch, out again, come back for dinner, and then out again past dark to play flashlight tag. I think I would be charged with child endangerment these days if my kid (3 years in the future) was doing stuff…

Has anyone considered that, like many things, maybe childraising knowledge has improved over time, and maybe it is true that it's dangerous and a bad idea to let them roam around far away unsupervised? It always seemed reasonable to me, even when I was that age myself. An anecdote is that the only bone injury I had as a kid resulted from riding bikes with some other kids who had a "fun idea" of biking down this steep…

I doubt it. There's a difference between playing and exploring the real world, and sitting in a room.

My parents took the easy route of indoor parenting, with video games / books / school / instrument practice... be safe all the time. I was consistently at the top of my class and reasonably successful socially... but that upbringing did a lot of damage mentally. It's like being raised in a glass cage.

I plan to go the other way with my kids. Buy 10 acres out in the country or woods near some other families, far from the concrete jungle... Let the kids run free and explore, sit and learn, play video games, whatever. My parenting mentality is to provide freedom, and advice on using that freedom (living). If they ignore my advice and do stupid stuff, the pain will teach them the value of advice.

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#193

Post by xiaoma »

oddstorms wrote: post #188
m_mueller wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a Swiss with a small child, this is the main reason why I couldn't move to the US or UK. Your 70ies examples are still common enough in Switzerland. 6 year olds are sent to Kindergarden on their own (after a bit of training with their parents). Put the visibility triangle on and off you go. Parents are discouraged by the school authorities to bring by car. Today looking back at this I can see the value. Maybe it h…

They're still common here in the US too. Nothing has changed except typical irrational emotional kneejerk reactionary people who want us to believe that this well intentioned nanny state is taking away our rights. It's a mixture of typical conservative stupidity and obnoxious condescension. Even though productivity is at an all time high, for example, these traitors still want us to believe that people used to work s…

This is a gratuitously polarizing and flamewar-baiting comment.

The issue described in the article is not a directly partisan one and parents are not "traitors" for having a different idea than you do about how independently their children should be allowed to explore their surroundings.

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#194

Post by ghaff »

BarkMore wrote: post #28

When I was 15 years old in the 1970s, I went a 100 mile backpacking trip with five youth between 15 and 16 years old. We thought it was normal at the time. When I told my younger colleagues at work about this trip, they were shocked that our parents sent us off without adult supervision. There was also some concern that we went on this trip without a mobile phone!

I suspect that a lot of people today would be seriously bothered by the fact that mobile phones and other forms of emergency contact just weren't an option until relatively recently.

I also went to college at 16 which I suspect would horrify some people today.

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#195

Post by espitia »

Kluny wrote: post #146
freehunter wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After reading the parent I was about to say "I'm almost 30 and I barely feel safe wandering alone". Not just crossing major roads (I live downtown in my little city, but I have to cross a major road to get to any shops, which puts a big damper on my walking) but just one person walking down the road, by themselves? It's almost a scandal. And if I'm biking around town, especially not dressed in spandex like a bicyclis…

Yeah, it's weird as hell to be the only person walking on an empty street.

Reminds of a time when a friend Of mine was rollerblading to my home from hers (~5 miles). She called me mid way because she found 2 kids (maybe 12 years old) carrying a ton of stuff down an empty 3 mile road. She asked me to drive my car to them to help them out carrying all the stuff. When I got there, one of them hopped on right away but the other held back, almost with a scared face. My friend insisted that they let us help but I told her to leave them alone. We left.

It felt weird to feel like I did something wrong.

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#196

Post by kasey_junk »

pvg wrote: post #187
kasey_junk wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess I just don't understand the point of the article. To me it seems an indictment of current parenting modes, based on the amount of geometric freedom allowed a very small subset of the population in comparison to the amount of geometric freedom allowed another, different very small subset of the population. I guess what I'm saying is, its a pretty ridiculous article that doesn't line up with reality now or then…

It's anecdotal but it doesn't seem that ridiculous, at least, not in the face of your criticism which seems to be 'think of the disadvantaged kids'. Disadvantaged kids may have had even greater constraints and lived in a more dangerous world but that's a point in favour of the article - they had to get around and so did anyway. I'm going straight to hell for using this as an example in a pointless forum argument but…

So this actually gets to 2 different readings of the point of the article.

One reading, the one that maybe I'm reading into it, is that parents now are viewing the world as more dangerous than it is, and are ignoring the dangers that existed in the past to get to this viewpoint. This viewpoint is then informing their view about what is appropriate for their children. That is, I took the anecdote to mean, parents are misjudging the risks currently and were viewing the past to be less risky than it was.

The other viewpoint, which I think you are presenting is, parents now don't have any different assessment of the risks, they just have less appetite for risk. Given that interpretation, I'll buy the lesson of the anecdote is just have more appetite for risk.

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#197

Post by jimmaswell »

losteric wrote: post #192
jimmaswell wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has anyone considered that, like many things, maybe childraising knowledge has improved over time, and maybe it is true that it's dangerous and a bad idea to let them roam around far away unsupervised? It always seemed reasonable to me, even when I was that age myself. An anecdote is that the only bone injury I had as a kid resulted from riding bikes with some other kids who had a "fun idea" of biking down this steep…

I doubt it. There's a difference between playing and exploring the real world, and sitting in a room. My parents took the easy route of indoor parenting, with video games / books / school / instrument practice... be safe all the time. I was consistently at the top of my class and reasonably successful socially... but that upbringing did a lot of damage mentally. It's like being raised in a glass cage. I plan to go th…

How did the mental damage express itself, more specifically? Not necessarily doubting it, but I'm curious what you feel the effects were on you.

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#198

Post by shams93 »

Kluny wrote: post #114
FrancoDiaz wrote: post #10

I have a 4 year old, in my mid 40s, and think about this a lot for some reason. In the 70s during the summer, when I was around 7, we would wake up, eat breakfast, go out and about wherever we wanted, come back for lunch, out again, come back for dinner, and then out again past dark to play flashlight tag. I think I would be charged with child endangerment these days if my kid (3 years in the future) was doing stuff…

Media is part of it, but the other part is this, taken from the first comment on the linked article: "I can’t help but notice how many freeways and roads are between Sheffield and Rother Valley. We can’t blame parents alone for the loss of childhood freedom. Since 1919 We have purposely designed our cities to maximize vehicle throughput and require car ownership and the result is an environment that is lethal for 8 y…

Yeah the traffic is a killer, I was almost killed by a driver who straight up ran a red light going around 75mph and nearly collided with me, an old man and an (estimated) 8 year old girl, its very dangerous to be a pedestrian, even more dangerous than being a motorcycle rider.

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#199

Post by erikpukinskis »

Kluny wrote: post #114
FrancoDiaz wrote: post #10

I have a 4 year old, in my mid 40s, and think about this a lot for some reason. In the 70s during the summer, when I was around 7, we would wake up, eat breakfast, go out and about wherever we wanted, come back for lunch, out again, come back for dinner, and then out again past dark to play flashlight tag. I think I would be charged with child endangerment these days if my kid (3 years in the future) was doing stuff…

Media is part of it, but the other part is this, taken from the first comment on the linked article: "I can’t help but notice how many freeways and roads are between Sheffield and Rother Valley. We can’t blame parents alone for the loss of childhood freedom. Since 1919 We have purposely designed our cities to maximize vehicle throughput and require car ownership and the result is an environment that is lethal for 8 y…

> We have purposely designed our cities to maximize vehicle throughput and require car ownership

This is just one specific example of the broader phenomenon, which is corporations seek to remove all of our abilities to take care of ourselves and our communities, so that they may resell those things to us as products. Requiring cars to move around is just the surface.

We go to coffee shops and restaurants to see our friends.

We purchase MP3s or concert tickets to hear music.

We order food instead of cooking it let alone growing it.

And of course this is all a luxury to some: many of us would be happy to never have to walk significant distance, cook, or listen to a local musician ever again.

But it's in the corporations best interest that children aren't really given a choice. And that serves nation states' best interest, which is to grow the GDP. But the result is a world of people who, without a credit card, are babies unable to care for themselves. Short of someone putting food in our mouths and maintaining the grounds around us, we would be lost. Luckily we have the cash to afford these things.

And those who fall through the cracks of being able to hold a job are eaten up.

All hail GDP. All hail capital. Thank you Gates, Koch, Slim, Walton, for providing us with internet connectivity, petrol, and toilet paper this day.

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#200

Post by Cerium »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #199
Kluny wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Media is part of it, but the other part is this, taken from the first comment on the linked article: "I can’t help but notice how many freeways and roads are between Sheffield and Rother Valley. We can’t blame parents alone for the loss of childhood freedom. Since 1919 We have purposely designed our cities to maximize vehicle throughput and require car ownership and the result is an environment that is lethal for 8 y…

> We have purposely designed our cities to maximize vehicle throughput and require car ownership This is just one specific example of the broader phenomenon, which is corporations seek to remove all of our abilities to take care of ourselves and our communities, so that they may resell those things to us as products. Requiring cars to move around is just the surface. We go to coffee shops and restaurants to see our f…

Just a few days ago I was walking into Costco to buy a loaf of bread. Outside at the food court was an old Chinese man with what looked like a 4 year old grandson. The old man was playing a bamboo flute, very beautifully, while his grandson ate some food. The whole area was filled with some beautiful music which transported me back to time I have spent in China. I wish listening to live music was more common again.
Post reply on HN