What kids told us about how to get them off their phones • Hacker News Board

Re: What kids told us about how to get them off their phones

#11

Post by erikerikson » Fri, Aug 15, 2025, 2:22 PM UTC

jeffbee wrote: post #5

kevingadd wrote: post #3

> Since the 1980s, parents have grown more and more afraid that unsupervised time will expose their kids to physical or emotional harm. In another recent Harris Poll, we asked parents what they thought would happen if two 10-year-olds played in a local park without adults around. Sixty percent thought the children would likely get injured. Half thought they would likely get abducted. > These intuitions don’t even beg…

I don't get it either, especially because I don't know any parents who act like this. All the kids in my neighborhood just roam around, including mine. I wonder if this is another coastal/inland, liberal/conservative rift where the conservatives are for some reason afraid of everything.

Our experience of Seattle, conservative hotbed that it is, is that everything is as described in the article. We've been discussing moving somewhere else for this exact reason. Doesn't matter if we would let our kid out if there's no one to play with.

Re: What kids told us about how to get them off their phones

#12

Post by busterarm » Fri, Aug 15, 2025, 2:25 PM UTC

erikerikson wrote: post #11

jeffbee wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get it either, especially because I don't know any parents who act like this. All the kids in my neighborhood just roam around, including mine. I wonder if this is another coastal/inland, liberal/conservative rift where the conservatives are for some reason afraid of everything.

Our experience of Seattle, conservative hotbed that it is, is that everything is as described in the article. We've been discussing moving somewhere else for this exact reason. Doesn't matter if we would let our kid out if there's no one to play with.

Live in the Carolinas. All of the neighborhood kids play together outside every afternoon. The teenagers are all too busy to loiter around because they're so involved in sports.

Re: What kids told us about how to get them off their phones

#13

Post by techdmn » Fri, Aug 15, 2025, 2:30 PM UTC

kevingadd wrote: post #3

> Since the 1980s, parents have grown more and more afraid that unsupervised time will expose their kids to physical or emotional harm. In another recent Harris Poll, we asked parents what they thought would happen if two 10-year-olds played in a local park without adults around. Sixty percent thought the children would likely get injured. Half thought they would likely get abducted. > These intuitions don’t even beg…

I've heard a few things on this. One is that there were a few high profile but very bad cases in the 80s, kids getting kidnapped and trafficked with law enforcement not really willing to even look into it. The odds are infinitesimal, but the cost of the negative outcome is very, very high. Second is kids getting run over by cars. Comparatively that happens all the time. Third is a general breakdown of social connection with people in your neighborhood.

Re: What kids told us about how to get them off their phones

#14

Post by dcow » Fri, Aug 15, 2025, 2:34 PM UTC

jeffbee wrote: post #5

kevingadd wrote: post #3

> Since the 1980s, parents have grown more and more afraid that unsupervised time will expose their kids to physical or emotional harm. In another recent Harris Poll, we asked parents what they thought would happen if two 10-year-olds played in a local park without adults around. Sixty percent thought the children would likely get injured. Half thought they would likely get abducted. > These intuitions don’t even beg…

I don't get it either, especially because I don't know any parents who act like this. All the kids in my neighborhood just roam around, including mine. I wonder if this is another coastal/inland, liberal/conservative rift where the conservatives are for some reason afraid of everything.

Over parenting and hyper-paranoia are liberal traits in my experience.

Re: What kids told us about how to get them off their phones

#15

Post by jeffbee » Fri, Aug 15, 2025, 2:34 PM UTC

erikerikson wrote: post #11

jeffbee wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get it either, especially because I don't know any parents who act like this. All the kids in my neighborhood just roam around, including mine. I wonder if this is another coastal/inland, liberal/conservative rift where the conservatives are for some reason afraid of everything.

Our experience of Seattle, conservative hotbed that it is, is that everything is as described in the article. We've been discussing moving somewhere else for this exact reason. Doesn't matter if we would let our kid out if there's no one to play with.

Maybe it's yet another Berkeley bubble. Kids' independence is pretty much taken for granted here. Nobody would bat an eye at a 10-year-old wandering around in the grocery store. There's a playground at the marina that is built by and continually remodeled by children (there is some overall supervision there of course).

Re: What kids told us about how to get them off their phones

#16

Post by amtamt » Fri, Aug 15, 2025, 2:35 PM UTC

kevingadd wrote: post #3

> Since the 1980s, parents have grown more and more afraid that unsupervised time will expose their kids to physical or emotional harm. In another recent Harris Poll, we asked parents what they thought would happen if two 10-year-olds played in a local park without adults around. Sixty percent thought the children would likely get injured. Half thought they would likely get abducted. > These intuitions don’t even beg…

> United States is so rare that a child would have to be outside unsupervised for, on average, 750,000 years before being snatched by a stranger.

Is this stat from 1980s or recent? If recent, what may be the likelihood that such stats are the outcome of parents' paranoia?

Re: What kids told us about how to get them off their phones

#17

Post by dcow » Fri, Aug 15, 2025, 2:36 PM UTC

techdmn wrote: post #13

kevingadd wrote: post #3

> Since the 1980s, parents have grown more and more afraid that unsupervised time will expose their kids to physical or emotional harm. In another recent Harris Poll, we asked parents what they thought would happen if two 10-year-olds played in a local park without adults around. Sixty percent thought the children would likely get injured. Half thought they would likely get abducted. > These intuitions don’t even beg…

I've heard a few things on this. One is that there were a few high profile but very bad cases in the 80s, kids getting kidnapped and trafficked with law enforcement not really willing to even look into it. The odds are infinitesimal, but the cost of the negative outcome is very, very high. Second is kids getting run over by cars. Comparatively that happens all the time. Third is a general breakdown of social connecti…

Do kids really get hit by cars at a level that would materially impact the “let them play in the park” calculus?

Re: What kids told us about how to get them off their phones

#18

Post by bryanlarsen » Fri, Aug 15, 2025, 2:40 PM UTC

jader201 wrote: post #6

kevingadd wrote: post #3

> Since the 1980s, parents have grown more and more afraid that unsupervised time will expose their kids to physical or emotional harm. In another recent Harris Poll, we asked parents what they thought would happen if two 10-year-olds played in a local park without adults around. Sixty percent thought the children would likely get injured. Half thought they would likely get abducted. > These intuitions don’t even beg…

> In many areas crime has been trending down but people seem to think things are more dangerous than ever, in general. I’m not saying you’re wrong, or that I disagree that Stranger Danger is overblown. But is it possible that part of the reason crime is down is because of Stranger Danger? I’m not suggesting it is, just that I can’t say with certainty that it isn’t.

Yes, that is a good question. It is generally answered in longer form treatments, like Skenazy's "Free Range Kids" book.

The answer is that the rate of crime on kids committed outside by strangers is down, even after you adjust for less time outside.

Re: What kids told us about how to get them off their phones

#19

Post by kleiba » Fri, Aug 15, 2025, 2:40 PM UTC

> But most of the children in our survey said that they aren’t allowed to be out in public at all without an adult. Fewer than half of the 8- and 9-year-olds have gone down a grocery-store aisle alone; more than a quarter aren’t allowed to play unsupervised even in their own front yard.

This is probably a uniquely US problem because after we moved to Europe, we noticed that we see kids without their parents nearby all the time. But, this does not automatically imply that children here spend less time on their phones, we often talk with other parents about it and almost everyone thinks that their kids have too much screen time.

Re: What kids told us about how to get them off their phones

#20

Post by dr_dshiv » Fri, Aug 15, 2025, 2:41 PM UTC

kevingadd wrote: post #3

> Since the 1980s, parents have grown more and more afraid that unsupervised time will expose their kids to physical or emotional harm. In another recent Harris Poll, we asked parents what they thought would happen if two 10-year-olds played in a local park without adults around. Sixty percent thought the children would likely get injured. Half thought they would likely get abducted. > These intuitions don’t even beg…

My son recently had to get rabies shots. Well, that was the recommendation because there was a bat in the sleeping quarters of his camp. The probability that the bat had rabies is vanishingly small. Just like the probability that the bat bit him with no marks.

But, you read about rabies (no cure, horrible death), and even if it is a 1-10 million chance and you can do something about it — well, he got the shot (over my protest!).

I think this is similar — child abducted and god knows what happens to them? And it’s your fault as a parent for not supervising? Even a 1-in-10 million chance seems like too much.

It’s not rational, but I think that’s the psychology. It is countered by mentioning the side effects of the vaccine —in this case, identifying the potential harms of over-supervision.