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

How Fact-Free Parenting Policies Rob Kids' Independence

5kids1condo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 193 posts

Re: How Fact-Free Parenting Policies Rob Kids' Independence

#81

Post by walterstucco »

foepys wrote: post #35
geff82 wrote: post #5

While helicopter parenting is a thing here in Germany, too, it is still possible to use your sane judgement as a parent for a lot of things. My daughter is not yet in school (so I am not into a peer group that talks about such stuff), but I see the 7-year-old neighbour kids walking to school without supervision, just as it has been the custom here in my own childhood. I have to admit there are fewer of those on the s…

There currently is discussion about how parent should stop bringing their kids to school and let them ride the bus or walk. In the often narrow streets in front of German schools, parents drive their children to the gate of the school in their SUVs and endanger everybody around them.

Not only in Germany

Milan at 8.30 AM is like a battle field of screaming moms and nannies trying to get kids off these giant tank-like-cars but the car is parked in the middle of the street or on the sidewalk

Re: How Fact-Free Parenting Policies Rob Kids' Independence

#82

Post by Chris2048 »

icebraining wrote: post #79
galfarragem wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Translating parent comment and playing devil's advocate: What did happen in the western world that made parents not allowing their kids to wander around? He proposed one explanation in a contrived way: leftist politics. Instead of mindless downvoting, how would you explain it?

Plenty of countries in Europe are way more leftist than the US, yet we still have kids wandering around. Seems like a very poor correlation.

Which ones are you thinking about?

Re: How Fact-Free Parenting Policies Rob Kids' Independence

#83

Post by Chris2048 »

tempestn wrote: post #78
new299 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"A 2003 study in Canada found just one case nationwide of a stranger abducting a child, in the entire two years prior." Without knowing if, and how many children rode the bus alone, this information is not meaningful.

Of course it is. One incident in two years, out of a population of tens of millions, is effectively zero. Regardless of how many kids ride the bus, if there were a significant number of predators out there waiting to abduct children, there are sufficient opportunities available that it would happen with some regularity. It's not for lack of unsupervised bus riders that it's such a rare occurrence.

The entire population of children do not all ride alone on a bus though. It's % of those who do that that are abducted is important.

Re: How Fact-Free Parenting Policies Rob Kids' Independence

#84

Post by jdietrich »

dagw wrote: post #39
dwaltrip wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the post: > And the odds of your child being kidnapped by a stranger on the bus? Incredibly long. A 2003 study in Canada found just one case nationwide of a stranger abducting a child, in the entire two years prior. I personally found the article very compelling. This kind of mindless fear, in direct contradiction of clear evidence, makes my blood boil.

While I agree with the general assertion in the article, cherry picking statistics for just one, very rare, crime isn't compelling evidence. Why not present the stats for all relevant crimes?

Practically all crime is at an all-time low, but that's largely beside the point.

Is the risk of robbery intolerably awful, or have we become unreasonably timid? I think that America (and to a significant extent Canada) is still in the throes of zero tolerance culture, where any risk is intolerable and any action to mitigate risk is justified.

Two kids get into a scuffle at school? Expel them both. Don't worry about what happens to those kids, don't worry about who started the fight, don't worry about the chilling effect on normal childhood behaviour, because we have zero tolerance for violence. The war on drugs, the war on terror, the broken window theory, mandatory minimum sentences, three-strike laws, the criminalization of poverty, the school-to-prison pipeline. When the only acceptable rate of crime is zero, the ends always justify the means.

https://www.brennancenter.org/publication/crime-trends1990-2...

Re: How Fact-Free Parenting Policies Rob Kids' Independence

#85

Post by galfarragem »

WillPostForFood wrote: post #71
galfarragem wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Translating parent comment and playing devil's advocate: What did happen in the western world that made parents not allowing their kids to wander around? He proposed one explanation in a contrived way: leftist politics. Instead of mindless downvoting, how would you explain it?

General increase in risk aversion. Same reason there are seat belt laws, helmet laws, firecrackers are illegal, you have to take your shoes off to get on a plane, lawn darts are banned, and people fear second hand smoke. To tie it back to the parent comment, there is data that shows more individualistic people take more risks, so perhaps it is tied to the decline of individualism, and religion. Regarding kids specifi…

Doesn't your explanation corroborate the parent comment? Individualism and traditional families are more correlated with right-wing policies.

Re: How Fact-Free Parenting Policies Rob Kids' Independence

#86

Post by HelloNurse »

gwatch wrote: post #42
Stratoscope wrote: post #37

Back around 1960, when I was eight and my little sister was six, we went with our dad to a chess tournament at the Mechanics' Institute in San Francisco. [1] Of course if you're six and eight and not really into chess, nothing could be more boring. So we asked Dad if we could do something else. He gave us a few nickels and quarters and said "sure, how about riding the cable cars and go see the town?" So we did! It wa…

This won't happen today in San Francisco city, because of decrease in social capital. I live downtown and I will not anyone's kids to wander around like that. First, you'll be lucky if MUNI driver is even remotely friendly, then there are druggies on the street, and so on. Illegal immigration, homelessness fueled by liberal/leftist policies, crime, gangs, drug trade have turned the city into a place quite unrecogniza…

The attitude of accepting the status quo, blaming someone, and proudly doing nothing is far more politically "cancerous" than any misguided policy. Can't you think of ways to increase the "social capital"? Don't you share the good intentions that, as you admit, inspired a long period of "leftist" Californian governments?

Re: How Fact-Free Parenting Policies Rob Kids' Independence

#87

Post by AstralStorm »

Chris2048 wrote: post #83
tempestn wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course it is. One incident in two years, out of a population of tens of millions, is effectively zero. Regardless of how many kids ride the bus, if there were a significant number of predators out there waiting to abduct children, there are sufficient opportunities available that it would happen with some regularity. It's not for lack of unsupervised bus riders that it's such a rare occurrence.

The entire population of children do not all ride alone on a bus though. It's % of those who do that that are abducted is important.

Typically not possible to estimate for either murders or abductions which ate already extremely rare nowadays in general.

Are you suggesting chasing accuracy in a fraction of a fraction?

Re: How Fact-Free Parenting Policies Rob Kids' Independence

#88

Post by DanBC »

sametmax wrote: post #54
averagewall wrote: post #50

What must be the most painful part of this is that he's in a weak position having shared custody. A normal parent could just give the middle finger and they'll never have their kids taken away for a single minor behaviour like that. But someone with tenuous custody has to bend over backwards to look like they're doing it right. It seems he could actually lose his kids quite easily because they have another home ready…

It's amazing an institution as such power, and that they can exercise such power, not based so much on a legal ground as on moral ground. Yeah they mentioned lawyers, but there is no law against what the parent did.

They can't do anything without going to court. Of course there are laws that govern this.

Re: How Fact-Free Parenting Policies Rob Kids' Independence

#89

Post by DanBC »

averagewall wrote: post #50

What must be the most painful part of this is that he's in a weak position having shared custody. A normal parent could just give the middle finger and they'll never have their kids taken away for a single minor behaviour like that. But someone with tenuous custody has to bend over backwards to look like they're doing it right. It seems he could actually lose his kids quite easily because they have another home ready…

> What must be the most painful part of this is that he's in a weak position having shared custody.

No he isn't. Children have a right to be with their parents, and it's important that fathers are involved with their children.

It would still need to go in front of a court.

Do you have evidence that Canadian courts ignore those rights?

Re: How Fact-Free Parenting Policies Rob Kids' Independence

#90

Post by falsedan »

Chris2048 wrote: post #80
devwastaken wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Illegal immigration, homelessness fueled by liberal/leftist policies, crime, gangs, drug trade have turned the city into a place quite unrecognizable compared to 1960. Sounds like something that should be backed up by a data point if you're looking to contribute something to the discussion. >Leftism is a cancer, and a road to third world culture, paved by good intentions. You've given exactly one point, with no refe…

> Sounds like something that should be backed up Why? People state their opinions and experiences on HN all the time without such a requirement.

Because this one vilifies a large group of people based on their political preferences; and politics is basically a battle to see whose opinion will be reflected in reality.

"language X is better than Y" is an opinion we accept at face value without sources, since it doesn't affect users of language Y, and has limited impact if it's wrong. Comparing a political stance to a disease does affect the users (implies they're 'sick' and need treatment) and has a big impact if it's wrong (and the non-leftism policies get put into place).

Compare "Perl is better than PHP" to "PHP is the brain tumor of server-side web languages".

Plus: there's no indication of which policies have caused this situation, so it's presumptuous to claim they're caused by leftism.

Post reply on HN