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

101–110 of 193 posts

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

#101

Post by Ntrails »

This article is depressing as hell.

I used to walk to school at the age of what, 8? There was one really quite busy road I had to cross on my own, the rest was residential. But learning to cross the road is something that was dogmatically addressed from a very young age. "Stop. Look. Listen." I remember learning about that aged 5ish? My parents knew I could cross the road, they'd taught me, the schools had taught me. It was tested in the crucible of parental observation and then I was trusted to continue.

Of course someone could come along and kidnap me as I blithely wandered along the pavement. But frankly if we're going to spend our lives obsessing about extreme tail risks then we've already lost.

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

#102

Post by dagw »

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.

Why? People state their opinions and experiences on HN all the time without such a requirement.

Because we're literally talking about an article about how fact-free policies are a bad thing.

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

#103

Post by AstralStorm »

dagw wrote: post #94
walterstucco wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Honestly I'd be far more worried about my kid being hit by a car But why? Is it common for them to be hit by cars? Is it safer for them to go to school with parents? And if someone hits you while you are trying to protect your kid, is it less traumatic? And if while you take them to school you hit someone else's kid, is it less traumatic? Is it common for kids to drown or fall and die while parents are not there? F…

Is it common for them to be hit by cars? According to CDC it's the second most common cause of accidental injury death among children aged 5-14 (after being in a car crash)

CDC has data for the US only. The suspicion is that suburban development is the main cause, not walking to school or to school bus.

In actual cities the rates should be lower as roads are not mixed with recreational or pedestrian areas as much, at least in Europe. It is still the leading cause though. (WHO has good data.)

Quite a few accidents are also caused by biking...

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

#104

Post by lawl »

galfarragem wrote: post #95
Chris2048 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which ones are you thinking about?

According to my point of view, in Western Europe urban areas only the poor kids wander around and just because their parents don't afford to control them. However in Eastern Europe, nowadays not correlated with leftist policies, kids wander around..

> in Western Europe cityscapes only the poor kids wander around and just because their parents don't afford to control them

wat? Well, since I can only speak for the country I grew up in.

Switzerland: Definitely not the case. Letting kids wander around alone is the norm here, and no, that's not because everyone is poor.

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

#105

Post by new299 »

tomohawk wrote: post #76
new299 wrote: post #21

I'm sympathetic. But given the article is against "fact-free" parenting. I didn't find the data presented very compelling. Basically you'd need to know how common crime against children traveling unsupervised on buses in a similar scenario. The closest example presented is kids in New York riding the subway, so presenting stats on that would be useful. I'd also like more details on the Japanese example, it's honestly…

The point is, this guy shouldn't have to prove that it is safe. Rather, the state should have to prove that he did something wrong, as defined by a law. If the state thinks that this is wrong, the state should provide evidence that it is wrong and get a law passed. The state in this case is acting like a terrorist organization. It has no law on its side, and is at least implicitly threatening to take away the kids.

This seems tangential to what I was trying to (perhaps unclearly) express.

I personally would agree with author of the post. However, the author is saying "it's not dangerous to do this", as opposed to "it is a basic human right to do this". He is also asserting that the opposing view is not supported by the facts (it's "fact free").

That's all fine. But then the author presents statistics he's gathered, none of which really strongly support his case. And in fact, I would not be surprised if you could cherry pick statistics to support either case.

It would be better to either:

1. Find better statistics. 2. Not present poor statistics, and then say "look here this supports my argument", when it doesn't.

Or at least, apply caveats to the data...

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

#106

Post by sametmax »

DanBC wrote: post #88
sametmax wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

About the result yes. But the procedures they engage can have a tremendous impact on one's life, and even more when a court is involved, whether they are right or not.

Can you imagine having to kiss some distant bureaucrat bottom, accepting they invade your life, endangering your reputation, making you question your choices, threatening you to loose your kids, making them look at you differently, all that __even before any decision is taken__ ?

This is madness.

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

#108

Post by majewsky »

Ntrails wrote: post #101

This article is depressing as hell. I used to walk to school at the age of what, 8? There was one really quite busy road I had to cross on my own, the rest was residential. But learning to cross the road is something that was dogmatically addressed from a very young age. "Stop. Look. Listen." I remember learning about that aged 5ish? My parents knew I could cross the road, they'd taught me, the schools had taught me.…

When I went to school (20 years ago in Germany), policemen visited each 1st grade class to teach them about traffic safety.

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

#109

Post by [deleted] »

icebraining wrote: post #100
galfarragem wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to my point of view, in Western Europe urban areas only the poor kids wander around and just because their parents don't afford to control them. However in Eastern Europe, nowadays not correlated with leftist policies, kids wander around..

Do or did you live in Western Europe? My experience may not extend to most countries, so I'm curious to know where you've seen that.

[deleted]

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

#110

Post by sametmax »

vacri wrote: post #66
sametmax wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the olden days, the occasional slip-up would slide. These days if you say the wrong thing, you can spend weeks or months defending it, and it can even cost you your job. I think Trump is proving you wrong. But I get your point, the risk is really because a few people are idiots with too much powers to break things. We see the same things with the medical personal: they get very cautious and conservative because…

Trump isn't really proving me wrong. He made a lot of promises. He's completely unable to get any of them done; he's a completely ineffective politician. He's alienated his own staff and political allies. He won't survive the next election, and doesn't even want to. He doesn't care to stay, and without impeachment, there's no way to remove him. Total amount of elections won = 1, total amount of 'stuff done' = 0. Trum…

> He really is an atypical case here.

Not in my experience.

I France we have politicians lying, cheating and even being condemned coming back all the time.

Post reply on HN