Wow. Yesterday, you’ll recall, I printed a post from the public Facebook page of Montgomery County Councilman Hans Riemer, who was repeating third-hand gossip about the Meitivs from the friend of a neighbor.
How statesman-like. He contended that the friend of a friend had said the Meitivs were a bit “off” and the neighbors had been worried about the Meitiv kids for “years.” (Interestingly, despite all that worry, the kids have been, and remain, perfectly fine. Delightful, in fact.)
Mr. Riemer went on to post this:
Hans Riemer No doubt. I was constantly out under similar circumstances. I think the police and CPS should ignore this family. But I have also heard from parents in the neighborhood that this has been going on since the youngest was a toddler. A ten and a six year old out free ranging is one thing but a seven and a three year old is another thing. So I do not think the parents are responsible. In any event.. If I did let my kids wander all over silver spring I would sure as heck give them a way to reach me if they got into trouble.h
Third-hand he believes a rumor about a family? I suggest that if Mr. Riemer would like to stay out of trouble, he step away from the keyboard. — L.
101 Comments
” If I did let my kids wander all over silver spring I would sure as heck give them a way to reach me if they got into trouble.”
Does he know if the kids do or do not know their phone number? My kids do. And I tell them to call me if they have problems. Sometimes I give them the cell phone when out riding bikes, but often I do not. Why not? Because everyone else has a BETTER phone than I have. Mine is cheap, and does not have coverage on a lot of the roads that I tell my kids that they prefer to ride on.
Does Mr. Riemer know that the kids did not ask the police to let them call their parents? Even if they had a phone, would the police have let them use it? I am kind of thinking that they would not.
Not to spread more rumors but there’s someone going around saying that they were at the Smithsonian and the kids were there “running wild and causing trouble/damaging exhibits” and the parents weren’t there. The parents were eventually called and “came quickly”. Seems that there’s quite the campaign against this family.
Sounds like Hans Riemer has foot-in-mouth disease.
the parents might be the worst parents in the world otherwise (not saying they are, just that who knows), but letting kids at that age go to the park by themselves is not evidence of that.
So first he agrees with letting the kids out, but now because of a situation that happened 3 years ago he condemns them? Blatantly ignoring the fact that in those 3 years the kids are still around, unharmed, and still having fun being on their own.
Again, after 3 years of this that Mr Reimer is pointing out the kids have survived without harm, until the police and CPS got involved.
Sounds like a politician trying to have it both ways, as usual.
The rest is just opinion, blather, slander, or whatever else you want to call it.
“I think the police and CPS should ignore this family.”
So he basically agrees that the CPS and police are overstepping their authority. Is he going to intervene in some way to try to address this issue?
Several people have suggested that solution for the Meitivs is for them to move. While I completely understand that pov, and have definitely given serious thought of getting the heck out of this county myself, I think that’s the complete opposite approach they (and the rest of us who live here) should take. Essentially we’d be just giving up. Also, while I can’t speak for the Meitivs, I happen to like living here for the most part and don’t want to be forced out by obnoxious neighbors and awful elected leaders.
No, what this has done is made me want to get more involved in the community and force change myself. While Riemer technically sided with the Meitivs in his public actions, his decision to spread defamatory statements on his Facebook page does not speak well of his judgment. If that’s the way he wants to roll, well, maybe it’s time for Hans to get back into private practice.
Let me clarify one thing above: it’s a handful of obnoxious neighbors. Almost everyone I’ve talked to on my street thinks CPS is way, way out of bounds. Most of the people here are fairly sensible when it comes to these matters.
aryland Child Protective Services Procedures (SSA95-13) define an “unattended child” as: A child under eight left alone or in the care of a person who is not reliable or who is under 13.
As i understand it, one child is 10 and the other is 6. So, until they change the law they are going to subject their kids to unnecessary trauma.
You can’t change laws on the backs of children’s tender emotional states. It has to be done in Annapolis. Since we are all adults we should know that and abide by the law.
Whining when a policeman actually does the right thing and abides by the letter of the law does no one any good.
Go ahead and get the law changed and then abide by that law. Having children wilfully disregarding a rule is horrible parenting. Frankly, it could not be worse parenting.
And frankly, if this does continue, then it speaks to one thing. It speaks to the parents need for attention. It is certainly not doing the children any good at this point.
The Meitivs have lawyered up and are suing. Mr. Riemer, some unsolicited advice, shut up shut up shut up.
Why did no one call the police 3 years ago when they saw a toddler and seven year old out by themselves? Now that the oldest is ten, they are no longer capable of taking care of themselves?
Maybe the police could have given the kids a way to contact their parents, rather than waiting to get CPS involved.
Joe B, Maybe the parents considedred their ten year old to be reliable enough to look after his sister.
and in my opinion, since they knew they were willfully violating a rule they are suing as an offensive measure. Whether or not they will sue Riemer or anyone else is not the point.
This is totally ridiculous.
kate
That is not for the police to decide. The bottom line is that the parents knew how the police would respond and put them out there as weapons in their cause of whatever their cause happens to be.
there is no excuse for this behavior. none
Kate,I should have said that there is a rule for this, and it is not 10, it is 13. It is clear that the parents think the 10 year old is old enough. And perhaps he is. That is not the point. The police have a clear rule, and they will properly attend to it. Being clear about rules for little children is actually more important than being strict with rules for adults.
I can tell you that if they live in Woodside, the kids were going the wrong way, I live in Woodside Park. I live four houses down from one of the parks in a Meitiv picture, and about a half mile from the other park.
Just since so many people keep saying, “Why don’t you move from Maryland?” I want to note that if you work for NIH, moving from Maryland is not feasible unless you want a one-hour-plus commute each way. I don’t know about the Meitivs, but the same philosophical leanings that make me want to let my son walk around our neighborhood also make me want my husband and I to spend less time in the car and more time at and near our home.
Joe B : “Unattended” child most likely was intended to refer to children left alone at home, not to children playing outside, walking to school, etc. I am old enough (54) to be pretty sure of what the original intent may have been.
For your information, children used to play outside and walk to school as a matter of course. No one would have considered it neglect that children played outside or walked to school.
Heidi
“For your information, children used to play outside and walk to school as a matter of course. No one would have considered it neglect that children played outside or walked to school.”
Seriously. It is clear that you consider that I am too young to remember that. The proper way to address this is to ask about my experience. Thanks for showing you were not trained properly either.
Go ahead and change the rule. The rule is ambiguous enough to be clearly applied to this situation. It was already once, and the parents were convicted in a court of law. What were they doing, thinking that, well, since we got convicted once, they won’t do it again?
I do not know what they were thinking, I think that they were not thinking.
Joe B,
First I need to know, the B, short for Bastard?
Next, the family is not in violation of the law. Get that straight. CPS guidelines are not law.
Next, you oh so wonderful Maryland cops, when did they not follow procedure? This time when they unlawfully detained two citizens or the first time when they took them home?
One of the worst things that happens as a result of something like this happening is all of the conjecture that starts popping up. People making snap opinions and decisions based on things not in evidence only to have those same snap decisions refuted as more evidence is released.
There have been comments that stated that police must have a vendetta against the family because they arrived at the scene of the 2nd call a minute after the call. With the release of the 911 tape, we now know that that is false. The entire call took over 7 minutes from the time the dispatcher answered the call to when the caller said the police arrived. Police are required to respond to the majority of calls into 911 (calls for pizza or to complain because a letter didn’t arrive in the mail are usually discarded but may still result in a visit from the local PD). A dispatcher’s job is to take down the information as provided and to ask clarifying questions that enable them to triage the call.
I’m also not a huge fan of the demonizing of CPS that has become rampant. While I do agree that there are bad apples everywhere, I honestly believe that the majority of people who work in CPS and in law enforcement are doing it because they truly want to help people. And despite the bad things that happen in regard to CPS, they do serve their purpose. It wasn’t all that long ago that this country didn’t have a governmental organization that oversaw the well being of children. Anyone who has ever done any research of what was once known at “The Orphan Trains” can attest to how bad it could get.
I think a huge part of the reason why CPS gets such a bad rap is less about having control issues and more about how litigious our society has become. Almost as often as we hear about a child being kidnapped, we hear about cases where social workers (and police as well as probation and parole officers) are held accountable when they respond to a call, don’t find anything that’s overtly illegal, and leave only to later find out that a child died or a girl missing for years was holed up in some camouflaged bunker in the back yard. People are sued and jobs are lost. It’s not too far from the realm of possibility that the same fear that has taken hold in parenting has also extended to the people who work in these professions. If I knew that if I missed something and something bad happened that I could lose my job and be sued, I would take extra care to look at every little detail.
At Joe B:
The mere idea that this family is using their kids as weapons to fight the police is ridiculous. If these parents really didn’t care about what happened to their children, they would have sent their kids out to the park the day after the CPS had released their children back to them the first time.
If we really want to effect change, we need to use the facts, not conjecture.
Joe Bastard,
This family was never convicted in court of anything to do with this case. Now go learn things.
To Kimberly
” At Joe B:
The mere idea that this family is using their kids as weapons to fight the police is ridiculous. If these parents really didn’t care about what happened to their children, they would have sent their kids out to the park the day after the CPS had released their children back to them the first time.
If we really want to effect change, we need to use the facts, not conjecture.”
First of all, in general. I posted the exact copy of the pertinent law/rule. It is clear. Second and directly to Kimberly, after your son or daughter gets a speeding ticket what do you recommend to them. Do you recommend that they do it again?
And if they do it again, are they using bad judgement or good judgement or no judgement.
This has nothing to do with what I think. I think that the W’s kids who live two doors down from Fiarview park don’t play in the park alone. My kids would play in that park alone, because it is four doors down, and at a certain age, they should be old enough, and I would know what age that was. However, if I was censured, found guilty or otherwise convicted for bad judgement even though I disagreed with it, I would put that into a very special category.
This is an area where I need to show leadership in the family. I can do that by getting the rule changed, and I would do that.
Sending the kids out to get picked up again, should be reason for the next level of censure by the authorities. And it is clear that the parents have no respect for themselves or the system and they are instilling that in their children.
If you don’t like it, don’t try to change it, just ignore it. That type of parenting is the worst possible parenting. The very worst.
Joe B:
“Second and directly to Kimberly, after your son or daughter gets a speeding ticket what do you recommend to them. Do you recommend that they do it again?”
Let me change your scenario a bit. When I was a kid, I got a ticket while going to school for riding my bike on the wrong side of the road. My mother had explicitly forbidden me from crossing this particular busy street since my school was located on our side of this busy road.
Legally, according to the traffic laws on the books, bikes are restricted to the same laws that cars have to abide. Legally, I broke the law. However, when I came home from school and showed my mom my ticket, she got angry, went to traffic court to argue the ticket, lost because it was legally valid, and then told me I still couldn’t cross the busy street with my bike.
I never did get another ticket, but she was willing to risk a second ticket if it meant that I wouldn’t have to put myself in what she viewed as more danger. Did that make her a bad mother? Overprotective, yes. But not a necessarily a bad mother. Plus, I am sure, that many people here who rage about these people “snubbing their noses in the face of established rules” (not necessarily you, Joe B.) have allowed their children to ride their bikes on the sidewalks (violating vehicle codes) and against traffic (also violating vehicle codes).
I’m not condemning this hypocrisy (anyone who says they are not a hypocrite is a liar), but people need to recognize their hypocrisy.
To whom it may concern.
reading from the Gazette dated April 15th, this version is not online. If you want I will fax you my paper.
A couple of months after Danielle and Alexander Meitiv were found responsible for unsubstantiated neglect.
This is online and here is the link.
http://www.gazette.net/article/20150413/NEWS/150419807&template=gazette
After CPS investigated the earlier incident, the Meitivs were notified that a finding of “unsubstantiated neglect” had been made. That is one of three findings that can be made in neglect investigations. The others are “ruled out” and “indicated.”
An official said that the “unsubstantiated” finding is typically made when CPS has some information supporting a conclusion of child neglect, when seemingly credible reports are at odds with each other or when there is insufficient information for a more definitive conclusion.
This also appeared in the Washington post, You can google that, The Gazette is owned by the Washington Post btw.
So, they were sanctioned lightly.
Again, I can tell you that if the kids do live in Woodside, as I have read on numerous occasions, they were going the wrong way. If you listen to the 911 call the kids were headed towards DC.
I would never let my 10 year old go into DC, and they were two and a half blocks from DC. That would never happen, especially if my 10 year old was in charge of the 6 year old.
That speaks to immature judgement by the 10 year old.
Free range does not mean wandering into DC. Downtown Silver Spring is great, but of course, we are a densely populated area and so this makes for an interesting map. Put in 20910 Silver Spring and it will come up.
http://www.familywatchdog.us/ShowMap.asp?frm=0
If the concern was a homeless man was watching them, why did the officer pick up the kids, seems the Criminal concern was the homeless man’s intent. Why not go to talk to him and let the kids be alone.
Also if kids can walk to school 1 mile – no parent required they can walk to the park or where ever.
“Not to spread more rumors but there’s someone going around saying that they were at the Smithsonian and the kids were there “running wild and causing trouble/damaging exhibits” and the parents weren’t there. The parents were eventually called and “came quickly”.”
So the kids did not go to the park, but somehow on foot got to the Smithsonian? And the parents are making up everything else?
Seriously, have you ever been to a Smithsonian? How would anyone know whose kids are whose amongst those giant crowds of people?
1. I did not read to see if I got any responses. If there are, I will certainly give the courtesy of a response, but later.
2. Here is the link to the rule and the entire rule. I should have put that up earlier.
http://www6.montgomerycountymd.gov/content/frs-safe/resources/parents/childcare.asp
3. As far as supervision outside the home goes, that is more tenuous than inside the home. I would think that would be obvious.
here is the entire passage. There are clear points to make about the rules, but that is for a later time.
Maryland Child Protective Services Procedures (SSA95-13) define an “unattended child” as:
A child under eight left alone or in the care of a person who is not reliable or who is under 13.
A child aged eight through 12 left alone for longer than brief periods without support systems which should include phone numbers of parents, other family members or neighbors, information about personal safety, and what to do in an emergency. Children in this age group may not be left to care for children under the age of eight.
A child 12 or over who is left alone for long hours or overnight or with responsibilities beyond capabilities or where there is some special risk factor such as mental retardation or physical handicap that would indicate that the child may be in jeopardy.
A child who has been abandoned.
A child of any age who is handicapped and left alone, if the handicapping condition constitutes a special risk factor which indicates that the child is in jeopardy.
Maryland Family Law, 5-701(p) states that NEGLECT is “the leaving of a child unattended or other failure to give proper care and attention to a child by any parent or other person who has permanent or temporary care or custody or responsibility for supervision under circumstances that indicate: that the child’s health or welfare is harmed or placed at substantial risk of harm.”
The Montgomery County Child Protective Services defines neglect as “the chronic failure of a parent, caretaker, household or family member to provide a child under 18 basic needs of life, such as: food, clothing, shelter, medical care, attention to hygiene, educational opportunity, protection and supervision. Cultural standards which differ from those of most of the community are not necessarily neglect.” To make a report call 240-777-4417.
Joe B.
“An official said that the “unsubstantiated” finding is typically made when CPS has some information supporting a conclusion of child neglect, when seemingly credible reports are at odds with each other or when there is insufficient information for a more definitive conclusion.”
We’ve all read this report and no one here is denying that this is the finding. The issue that most of us have is with the actual ability to find a family guilty of “unsubstantiated neglect”.
How is a finding like this any different than a court ruling that there isn’t enough evidence to convict a person of a felony, but they will still lose the right to vote or to own a firearm, and will have a strike placed against them in their record?
The truth is, there is no difference.
“I would never let my 10 year old go into DC, and they were two and a half blocks from DC. ”
Well then you’re a rather silly person. Would I let my child wander unaccompanied in Anacostia? No, but fortunately Anacostia is rather far away from where they were. The parts of DC that abut Silver Spring are hardly any more dangerous than lower Montgomery county in general, and some partts of DC are probably safer.
So many people have seemingly lost the ability to make fine distinctions. Every city has good and bad neighborhoods, thus making blanket bans on travel there rather quixotic. East New York in Brooklyn is much different than Park Slope, Brooklyn or Middle Village, etc. Northwest DC is, by and large, fairly tranquil.
Also, I’d like to add:
As recently at 2000 (and as early as 1925), SCOTUS has REPEATEDLY recognized that a parent’s right to raise their children without undue interference from the state is a fundamental right guaranteed under the 1st and 14th Amendments. Additionally, SCOTUS has also determined that when the state feels the need to make regulations that affect a parent’s right to rear their children, they need to prove that not only is it absolutely necessary to the greater good of children everywhere, but that it is also the least intrusive way. SCOTUS has even noted that the fact that some parents abuse and neglect their kids is not a compelling reason to restrict the rights of all parents.
I’ve posted that before on some of the other blog’s comments, but I feel that it needs repeating. After all, state law cannot trump federal law. Maybe it’s time that SCOTUS revisits this issue once more. Maybe the Meitiv case will be that case.
Reading some of the more hysterical comments on here (and on some other forums) would lead one not familiar with the area to believe that Silver Spring is a warzone crawling with child molesters. That’s not exactly what I see out my window at home or in the car, but maybe I need to get some clearer windows.
Bahahahaha! Isn’t that the pot calling the kettle black? Where on god’s green earth, in anytime in history, have ANY politicians been RESPONSIBLE? ALL politicians are first and foremost in the business of politics, NOT to make change and things better for people they reside over, but their own agenda. Benefiting themselves first, before anyone else.
I’m pretty sure this is just a another political ploy to garner favoritism. What better way than to side with the majority. “Hey, this guy supports and believes what we believe. I’ll vote for him again.” A lot of third-party influence. No one ever thinks for themselves anymore. Whether they realize it or not, they are nothing more than sheeple. Go with the status quo, so that you aren’t “ostracized”. Sacrifice your own beliefs and integrity, just so that you don’t get picked on.
Paul,
You would love the number of times I have pointed out to people about it being safer now, and about the crime rate being so low, including where the information comes from. Pretty much everyone responds with something to the effect of the FBI is lying about the crime rate.
They would rather believe Nancy Grace and facebook posts than documented facts by one of, if not the highest law enforcement agency in the US.
Could someone clarify which agency is the highest? At one point I was told it was the US Marshalls.
So…if it’s going on since the kids were toddlers and nothing has happened, wouldn’t that rather argue that the kids are safe?
Another solipsistic politico in full self-aggrandizement mode. He is a buffoon.
Warren,
I don’t even get that response. I just get people insisting that their own anecdotal experiences or even feelings trumps statistics.
Darn that lying FBI. Part of some big conspiracy to let in child molesters and cloned dinosaurs by luring us into some false sense of security.
Danger exists where there are proven risks. I’m currently in a debate on another forum over this matter. I’ve not only used statistics, but anectdotal evidence when asked if I actually know any little kids who walk a mile to school. I’m a school teacher at an urban school. It’s a charter without a bus system, so, yes, plenty of little kids walk a mile, give or take, home.
The response is why this school and these parents are crazy. No one has ever been kidnapped in this urban city. Ever. I even looked it up to be sure.
If there is no history of kidnapping, there is no real basis for significant risk.
Paul and Emily,
I have follwed some of the stories on Sex Offender Registry reform and such.
Cannot count the number of times I have been accused of being a sex offender or pedophile, on comment boards.
People for the most part I think want to live in fear. Fear is actually very liberating. It can relief one of responsibility. And fear can be comforting. As it is easier to stay inside afraid of the boogeyman, than to venture out and doing things while fearing the unknown.
They may not have done anything technically illegal.
But they weren’t too bright to continue tempting fate while they had an open file on them. They should have gotten that closed before continuing to do what go them in trouble in the first place.
An unsubstantiated child neglect means there’s not enough evidence to convict, but there’s not enough evidence to say there isn’t either. Which is why they’re being monitored.
Right now, CPS is building a paper trail and monitoring the family, as they would with any family suspected of neglect. Just because they’re crying foul to the media doesn’t mean that they did nothing wrong. CPS isn’t allowed to give their side due to privacy issues. CPS is damned if you do, damned if you don’t. Had they placed the children back in a truly neglectful environment without looking into it, they’d be sued. They are not mind readers, which is why they have investigations and due process.
I’m not going to say CPS is infallible, but most cases of frivolous reports are closed on a family and wrapped up quickly. The fact that it remained open says there’s more to the story.
Everyone wanted to be so quick to say it was nosy neighbors. It wasn’t. It was a concerned stranger who had never seen these children before. They wanted to say it was in a neighborhood. It wasn’t. At one point the children were outside an accounting firm. That is in the city with high foot traffic, where anyone could be watching them, not a suburbia where neighbors know each other and all the children band together and play street hockey and run across neighbors yards.
Even in “dangerous” urban areas (I put in quotes because many are not despite what people think) stranger danger child abduction just is not a thing. Concerns about children being hit by cars are more real, but those concerns apply to when your kids are actually in cars even more.
There’s a huge flap going on right now in a Different Arena[TM] and same thing is happening there — most of the accusations are coming from third-hand information. Under the aegis of presumed wrongdoing, Side A condemns Side B, and very few from Side A ever bother to investigate Side B firsthand. Always it’s repeat the gossip and add your own inflammatory opinion, cuz the gossip is so much juicier than the reality, and being outraged is so much more satisfying than cold dry facts.
The game of Telephone was supposed to be cautionary, not a blueprint for behavior.
JustaMom,
There is credence to the idea they were tempting fate, but I can’t ignore the bigger picture. If the law rules against children being able to be outside, this has the risk of going nationwide which will destroy communities that depend and thrive on people being able to walk around outside.
“You can’t change laws on the backs of children’s tender emotional states.”
But it’s not the law. It’s just CPS *guidelines* that they can subjectively enforce, not an actual law that the police should even be involved with unless there is real danger. They were WALKING.
And please explain this to me, Maryland Politicians”
Why do children in Montgomery County, MD get labeled as “walkers” and are assumed responsible enough to commute to school daily, and the school districts don’t legally have to provide bus service any more, yet these same kids cannot walk 2 blocks from their house without imprisonment?
Why the double standard?
Are school aged children only responsible during school hours and consider irresponsible outside of commuting to school?
Why give them a taste of actual responsibility and independence with walking to school and LURE them to parks and recreation areas geared toward young children *after hours* only to entrap them and stalk them like they are criminals instead of PLAYING CHILDREN?
Montgomery County and Maryland are sending a very clear message with this CPS/Police/Social Media campaign to the rest of the country:
Maryland is truly a HORRIBLE place to raise a family.
Just to be clear the law, actual law not CPS guidelines, does not apply to “outside” including parks:
http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/webmga/frmStatutesText.aspx?article=gfl§ion=5-801&ext=html&session=2015RS&tab=subject5
§5—801.
(a) A person who is charged with the care of a child under the age of 8 years may not allow the child to be locked or confined in a dwelling, building, enclosure, or motor vehicle while the person charged is absent and the dwelling, building, enclosure, or motor vehicle is out of the sight of the person charged unless the person charged provides a reliable person at least 13 years old to remain with the child to protect the child.
(b) A person who violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction is subject to a fine not exceeding $500 or imprisonment not exceeding 30 days, or both.
“They wanted to say it was in a neighborhood. It wasn’t. At one point the children were outside an accounting firm. That is in the city with high foot traffic, where anyone could be watching them, not a suburbia where neighbors know each other and all the children band together and play street hockey and run across neighbors yards.”
Huh? So apparently neighborhoods only exist in suburbia according to JustaMom. My inner city neighborhood where neighbors know each other and children band together to go sledding during freak southern snow storms doesn’t qualify as a neighborhood because it is not actually in the suburbs? That would certainly be news to our local city planners, neighborhood association and pretty much every resident of town.
And while I don’t know of any accounting firms (not sure what foot traffic JustaMom is expecting there on a Sunday evening) my neighborhood does have a hospital, a medical college, a handful of bars (gasp) and restaurants, a print shop, a gas station, a convenience store. There is even the occasional homeless person floating around. And, yes, my daughter, age 9, walks to some of these places and passed others while playing or walking the dog or walking to school on a daily basis and I am not concerned for her safety in the least. City life is not remotely scary for people who live in the city.
My old neighborhood had several businesses including an accounting firm, a law firm, and a professional copiers, all within a corner’s turn of your houses.
@ Joe B
I wish I had time to address on each of your concerns line, by line but I don’t. So let’s grab the basics. I looked at your link, I’ve seen this before. The big bold title says “Maryland State Law:” But right under that they say “Maryland Child Protective Services Procedures (SSA95-13). That is NOT law. In fact it is a wholly unauthorized expansion of the law.
The law that procedure is based on states:
“Family Law §5—801.
(a) A person who is charged with the care of a child under the age of 8 years may not allow the child to be locked or confined in a dwelling, building, enclosure, or motor vehicle while the person charged is absent and the dwelling, building, enclosure, or motor vehicle is out of the sight of the person charged unless the person charged provides a reliable person at least 13 years old to remain with the child to protect the child.
(b) A person who violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction is subject to a fine not exceeding $500 or imprisonment not exceeding 30 days, or both.”
http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/webmga/frmStatutesText.aspx?article=gfl§ion=5-801&ext=html&session=2015RS&tab=subject5
Pay close attention. The actual Law, refers only to being locked or confined in… The Meitiv children were never locked or confined in anything. The Meitiv parents were never given a day in court. They were neither charged nor convicted under Family Law §5—801. And no one can be charged or convicted under Procedure SSA95-13, because I repeat it is not law. Also in the part defining neglect CPS mixes under the header of Law combinations of actual law, and their own procedures.
Breaking it down Maryland Family Law, 5-701(p) states that NEGLECT is “the leaving of a child unattended or other failure to give proper care and attention to a child by any parent or other person who has permanent or temporary care or custody or responsibility for supervision *****under circumstances that indicate: that the child’s health or welfare is harmed or placed at substantial risk of harm.”******
I understand that some flexibility and discretion is required. But the state never was able to prove the requisite “substantial risk of harm.” Thus the “unsubstantiated” finding. Doing something that no one can prove is harmful twice, 3 times, or even 1,000 times doesn’t transform that action into a harmful action. And no one should have to change their lives over the unproven, and unprovable.
As to proven risks, the police put the kids at far greater risk of harm in the two instances they transported the kids in a motor vehicle (vehicle accidents being the #1 cause of death for children of their age.. and those that survive often suffer tremendously.) Do police even carry the booster seats needed to keep the shoulder strap from strangling a kid Devora’s size?
************
More than anything the link you provided is a clear indication why the Meitiv’s lawsuit needs to be won for every parent in America. The extra judicial expansion of the law, into areas the law specifically chose not to cover, and the treats to take children over extra judicial unsubstantiated findings is an unconscionable and unconstitutional violation of civil rights.
Just across the Potomac Virginia offers another example. You will find Kids in Cars advocates group reports prior efforts to get a law passed banning leaving kids in cars and the Virginia legislature rejected it. And yet… many local CPS branches publish “guidelines” that hold that no child may be left for “any length of time” (not one minute, not even if you can see the vehicle, not even if the parking lot is dangerously icy). But even though the law didn’t pass, CPS has threatened to take people’s children away for something that is not only NOT a law. But is something that the Virginia Legislature refused to make into law.
As to why a kid had to end up in the middle of this mess? I’m not a lawyer, so a lawyer will have to explain this a bit better. But my basic understanding is: If there isn’t actually a law, just a notion being enforced as law. There is no way to repeal this non-law expansion of the law. And the only way to prove the expansion to the law is illegal, is to take it to court. And you don’t get standing to sue because you are afraid to break a guideline with no force of law. You get the standing to sue because you can show that your rights were abused in the name of a non-law. In other words a kid had to be abused by the government, (not just threatened) for anyone to take this to court. In other words CPS was set up in such a way that the only way to challenge their power was to defy it. And at the risk of the child.
I had the displeasure to be in school when the rights of minors started getting trampled. We got repeatedly lectured by our teachers that we had no rights. But despite years of that, I hold some truths to be self evident…. that children are human and have human rights. I was treated with humanity and dignity in preschool, and similarly in elementary school, so I had the privilege to know what can and should be. I was not afforded that same dignity in middle school or high school. And in high school I swore to stand up for the basic human rights of minors who are so disparaged that adults won’t even listen.
One of those most basic rights: “Children have the right to some unsupervised time, and parents have the right to give it to them without getting arrested.”
@Joe B, the “unsubstantiated neglect” was discussed on this very site when it was news. It basically means they have no evidence that there was neglect, but no evidence that there was no neglect either. The CPS did not sanction them because they cannot sanction if they have no evidence of wrongdoing, but still keep the record since subsequent investigations might require it as background information.
About the argument that “there is a rule”, it depends on the rule. As explained in a previous article:
> “In Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 75 (2000), the Court explained that “the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects the fundamental right of parents to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of their children.”
Basically the argument of these parents is that the rule you mention is infringing their right as parents and should be invalidated, which seems to me perfectly possible. They are challenging a law they deem illegal and I think they actually have a good chance to get it invalidated if it gets to the court, for the benefit of all.
Donna,
You really need to pause a moment.
Outside an accounting firm……………..c’mon we know, beyond a shadow of a doubt that accountants more than any other career, are daywalker vampires that prey on brother and sister combos, that are 10 and 6 yrs old. I know it limits their prey greatly, and you would figure the daywalker accountant vampires would have become extinct by now. I am thinking the daywalker accountant vampires are the major customers of all the human trafficking.
Hey it is just a working theory, at the moment.
Oh and by the way JustaMom, the accounting firm we use is in a real dangerous part of town. Just to get to them, you have to dodge two dogs, a herd of sheep, and overly friendly donkey, horses and some cows. Opps and chickens. I would be on the edge of my seat watching kids trying to navigate those horrors.
just a mom…for your information cps never truely closes an investigation and i have never heard of anyone cleared by them, simply that the charges are unsubstantiated.when my name was cleared,so to speak, my lawyer requested that the file be destroyed. cps said they didn’t have a procedure for that! it took taking cps back to court numerous times before the judge got fed up and threatened the head of our local cps with contempt for that to occure. so don’t sit there on your high horse and claim that cps just didn’t have enough evidence to bring charges. they are in full cya mode and will never admit[nor will you apparently] that normal childhood behavior is not a crime. thank the gods that you are not cps or i guess every family in your district would be in jail.
Emily,
I grew up in a condo just outside of Toronto. Houses and parks, and Lake Ontario to the south. Strip plaza and 401 to the north. The plaza was right behind our highrise. Grocery store, pharmacy, bank, pizza shop, florist. hardware, bakery, laundromat, car wash and ………………..strip joint. Walked past the strip joint all the time to go to the other stores.
JustaMom April 16, 2015 at 1:52 pm:
Oh joy! How wonderful that busybody strangers can bring down the power of the state to turn two innocent kids’ lives upside down, just because the stranger feels “concerned”.
That’s truly scary! Everybody knows about Hell’s Accountants, scruffy characters hanging around armed with spreadsheets, just waiting to capture innocent kids and subject them to the horrors of double entry bookkeeping. [/sarc]
Warren, that sounds wonderfully convenient for quick trips of errands.
That neighborhood I’d move back to in a heartbeat, and if not the neighborhood, at least the city. Apparently it kept showing up on lists as one of the safest cities in America despite those dastardly neighborhood accounting firms.
I’m thinking back to some years ago of another debate, brought up by someone who seriously wanted to base childhood security and parental rights on… public water systems. Her idea was that being hooked up to a city water system would be a good baseline to see if the children’s basic needs were being met. Never mind the many children growing up in rural areas where everyone uses well water. For example, my husband grew up in the Middle of Nowhere. The family still uses well water. They have millionaire neighbors with a giant house who use well water. It’s the MIddle of Nowhere. There is no great city public plumbing. Yet, despite these examples, this woman still insisted a checkmark of childhood safety was a public water system.
When we say things like a child can only walk around in suburban home-only-zoned neighborhoods we exclude a big ol’ host of perfectly suitable communities.
I’m sorry, somebody on this thread is arguing that zoning an area mixed business-residential makes it into something other than a neighborhood?!
Oooh, somebody come get my kids and save them from the horror of life just up the hill from the corner grocery store. And just past them–an INSURANCE BROKER. Other side of the road–sensitive readers don’t go any further–AN OPTOMETRIST! Run by two wicked wicked people who evilly allow my kids to use their restroom if Nature screams before they can get home from their aimless wanderings around our horrible, horrible neighborhood!
“Yet, despite these examples, this woman still insisted a checkmark of childhood safety was a public water system.”
One of the laws or “guidelines” posted above required children to have relatives phone numbers at hand.
So I guess Amish kids can’t go anywhere since their relatives don’t use phones.
@Warren-
When we first moved to our town, there was an *eyesore* of a strip joint (my husband nicknamed it the sh#ty titty). The owner, who was in a disagreement with the township, decided to paint it rainbow colors and had a large mermaid (well-endowed, of course) on the front wall. My children always asked what they sold at the “Mermaid store” (sin!) and frequently asked if we could go there(no!). And this is a middle-upper class suburban town.
They tore it down a few years ago. It’s now a liquor store.
But an ACCOUNTANT’S OFFICE? Now that sounds truly terrifying!!
I would like to know why charges aren’t filed against the nosy neighbors or ‘helicopter bystanders’ that are sitting around video taping children being children or seeing a kid walking down the street and magically they have all of the answers. Seems to me they should be charged with harassment, improper use of 911 and falsely reporting a crime!!! This is the squeaky wheel getting the grease and if the children are in no harm, then the person reporting should be in for questioning!!!
lolli,
We had a laundry room in the basement of the highrise, but I prefered the plaza one, because the one wall of the strip joint was all brick, by a huge concrete slab. I would play catch with myself while doing the laundry. Come to think of it, I was doing the household laundry around ten years or maybe eleven.
The great thing, this was back in the days when everyone carried cash. You would be surprised how much cash the drunks dropped when they came out of the bar. I remember one fella dropped a wad of cash in a clip. I returned it and got a fifty as a reward.
@Warren: Back when I was a wee little baby, it was possible to come home from a single fishing trip very, very rich. Needless to say, many of the fishermen were soon very, very drunk.
So my now-brothers-in-law used to go down to the harbor after dinner and roll all the drunk guys who’d passed out at the top of the boat ramp when they decided that walking down something tilted when they were already pretty tilted themselves was too complicated.
You had to be smart. The cash was never on the concrete area infront of the bar, in was in the small grass field off to the side. Bank of Mother Nature is a drunk, a breeze, paper money and grass to catch it.
I want Hell’s Accountants in my neighborhood!
@JustaMom
“I’m not going to say CPS is infallible, but most cases of frivolous reports are closed on a family and wrapped up quickly. The fact that it remained open says there’s more to the story.”
The fact that it remains open is a reflection of the prejudices in your very next paragraph. And all the stuff @common sense said.
“Everyone wanted to be so quick to say it was nosy neighbors. It wasn’t. It was a concerned stranger who had never seen these children before.”
Do you need to know every person you walk past in order to be safe where you live? If your kids are complaining they don’t want dragged into the store with you, do you get the stink eye from strangers? If your kids submit with a look of upset to your strict parenting do people call the police for fear you emotionally or physically abused them into submission?
“They wanted to say it was in a neighborhood. It wasn’t.”
They live in the city, that city is their neighborhood. Children adapt to their environments. At 3 my daughter is better with subways than I was at 18 when I first set foot in NYC. Oh, I could school the New Yorkers on earthquakes, and dangerous flora and fauna in my sleep. But small children were better at getting on the train before the doors closed. You can forget reading a subway map, and spotting the correct train, like Lenore’s son did at 9.
“At one point the children were outside an accounting firm. That is in the city with high foot traffic, where anyone could be watching them,…”
I didn’t know accountants were dangerous? Should I keep my daughter away from her aunt? … But seriously, WTOP the local traffic radio frequently tells adults to get to well lit and trafficked public places if they feel unsafe. Why should this reasonable precaution be forbidden to our younger citizens? The 911 caller reported that Rafi and Devora started heading to the accounting firm when they noted they were being followed. City children know there is safety in being seen, it only becomes a problem when adults decide children should be neither seen nor heard.
“…. not a suburbia where neighbors know each other and all the children band together and play street hockey and run across neighbors yards.”
And do children stop having a need to be an independent part of their world just because they live in a city? Do they loose the need to engage their environments just because they must stick to the sidewalks and parks? Do children who live in cities deserve to be denied their basic needs? …… And keep in mind people are saying the flip side of these things you consider the only proper neighborhood for a child to have a life in. That if kids run around suburbia there are not enough eyes on them to protect them. So the children should only be walking around were there are lots of eyes. The world has never been perfect. But no one expected kids to quit wanting to live their lives until now… now that we can drug them into submission.
“They wanted to say it was in a neighborhood. It wasn’t. At one point the children were outside an accounting firm. That is in the city with high foot traffic, where anyone could be watching them, not a suburbia where neighbors know each other and all the children band together and play street hockey and run across neighbors yards.”
My neighborhood–yes, it’s a neighborhood–in inner-city Detroit has more of a sense of community than any suburb I’ve ever lived in. Neighbors know each other, the children play together–things I honestly never saw when I was living in the suburbs and didn’t even know my next-door neighbors, much less people who lived a few blocks away.
“A city with high foot traffic, where anyone could be watching them”–yes, that describes where I live. And it’s great! I feel safer allowing my kids to be outside unsupervised BECAUSE there is a lot of foot traffic and neighbors on porches and people out walking dogs, since that means if an emergency did occur, there’d be lots of helpers.
Hi Lenore, … Ah, I tried to start a response to this but I kept having images of policemen throwing frisbee with kids in parks. …. And the rest seemed so petty while there are kids out there who are better off out of their homes to avoid beatings, and thousands other challenges kids are facing in family, and noone standing up for them. … I just got lost for words until I worked out why.
Owen
“At one point the children were outside an accounting firm.” says Just a Mom
That is the most unintentionally hilarious thing I have read for a long time.
OMG an accountant!! Quick call CPS, the police, the FBI and the fire department!!
I understand it all now! I too live in fear for the safety of my children. Not one but TWO of my inlaws are evil accountants!
Shouldn’t you be calling in the IRS of the SEC to deal with the attacking accountants.
I can see the medical examiner kneeling beside the body, “There is no doubt. The distinct impression on his right temple comes from a high end calculator. Those accountants have got to be stopped.”
Yes, that was hilarious that the presence of businesses and parking lots makes it “not a neighborhood” and that Justamom would actually think foot-traffic made a place LESS safe rather than MORE safe. Obviously she’s never lived outside the suburbs. The most sociable places I’ve lived were the most mixed and urban neighborhoods and the least friendly is the classic suburb I’m now stuck in – it could be an abandoned movie set for all the signs of life I see on my street.
All this talk about the dodgy neighborhood is also hilarious to anybody who knows Silver Spring: the Woodside Park neighborhood is not some run-down urban slum; it’s more a high-end residential enclave, sprinkled with a few delis, boutique grocers, and synagogues. Yes, there are bits of Silver Spring that are rough around the edges, but that’s not where these kids live.
Ugh. foot traffic makes places safer. It is the “more eyes” principle.
@Anna
“The most sociable places I’ve lived were the most mixed and urban neighborhoods and the least friendly is the classic suburb I’m now stuck in — it could be an abandoned movie set for all the signs of life I see on my street.”
A few years ago I was visiting relatives and drove through the suburb where I lived as a grade-schooler. Judging from the upkeep of the houses and the cars, it was still a nice place, but …
Where the hell was everybody??
No kids, one adult mowing the lawn, and … crickets. Just crickets.
It would be ironic if Reimer is taking this position. He runs on community, families, bikes urban living, etc. i.e. the antithesis of driving your kid everywhere in an SUV. I wrote to him, but he has not replied.
And after all, Hans’ friend’s friend is the recognized arbiter of all things “off”.
Oh, geez, not to pile on, but i just read the comment about it not being a neighborhood because the “at-risk” kids were actually outside an accounting firm. Next thing you are going to tell me they dared to walk past an architectural office. Or worse, the grand-daddy of all anti-neighborhood establishments, a Notary Public.
“Everyone wanted to be so quick to say it was nosy neighbors. It wasn’t. It was a concerned stranger who had never seen these children before. They wanted to say it was in a neighborhood. It wasn’t. At one point the children were outside an accounting firm. That is in the city with high foot traffic, where anyone could be watching them, not a suburbia where neighbors know each other and all the children band together and play street hockey and run across neighbors yards.”
Comments like this just make me so sad. It’s ok to let your kids out, as long as there aren’t PEOPLE around.
I grew up in Houston. Right smack in the middle of the 4th largest city in the country. Not in a bad neighborhood, but certainly within walking distance of businesses. One of my favorite childhood memories was walking all by myself up to the local hardware store to buy some nails for a science project, and the storekeeper gave them to me for free. I don’t remember how old I was, but we moved away from there when I was 12.
My kids are growing up in suburbia, and the thing I dislike the most is that there are so few places they can GO that are within walking distance. I wish they lived where they could walk to shopping centers and meet up with their friends, or skateboard in empty parking garages, or — like my brother did when he was young — knock on the door of a local news station and make friends with the weather man!
Does this meet the standard of slander? If so, I’d be willing to chip in for a lawyer for the Meitivs
I’ll tell you whay, when I was there age I was all over the place. And there were child abduction’s way back in the 50’s and 60’s. Most of them were never solved or if they were the chid was found dead. I’m now 64 year’s old and I am sick and tired of you people criticizing people for raising their children the way they wish to. It sounds like “CPS” needs to back off and go after real problems like child abuse, kids not being fed you know the things they don’t do! I’m in bak of the “MEITIVS” all the way. AND DO YOU THINK IT MIGHT BE BECAUSE THEIR NAME SOUNDS JEWISH OR IT WAS FOUND OUT THEY ARE JEWISH AND THEY ARE BEING PERSECUTED LIKE ANOTHER JEW AT THE BEGINNING OF 0 A.D.! YOU CHRISTIANS SHOULD KNOW WHO THAT IS!
THAT’S ALL I HAVE TO SAY FOR NOW, BUT WAIT FURTHER IS COMING YOU BIGGOT!
HEY MICHELLE – THE FIRST WAS WHEN THEY WERE WALKING HOME FROM SCHOOL AND YES IT WAS A NEIGHBOR DRIVING BY THAT CALLED THE POLICE. CHECK ALL OF YOUR FACTS LADY. YOU MUST EDIT FOR A PAPER. ALSO, ” MR.RIEMER IS A DEVOTE IDIOT WHO TAKES LESSONS ON HOW TO BE ONE.” HE NEEDS TO GO BACK TO THE COLLEGE HE GRADUATED FROM AND RETURN HIS DEGREE, THAT IS IF IT IS AN AUTHENTIC DEGREE —- MR RIEMER.
William, I was quoting and responding to someone else.
I actually live in a suburb and there are all the businesses mentioned, except strip clubs. You gotta drive to one of the nearby suburbs or cities for that one. There’s also a yarn store and a comic book store. Just about all the businesses are owned by local people; so, our friends and neighbors. The grocery store is part of a chain, but it’s staffed by people that live in the suburb.
In the city where I grew up though, there’s a long street, technically part of a freeway, that was nothing but strip clubs, porn stores and motels (with options to pay by the hour, if you know what I mean) until they put a charter school in the middle, lol.
I love the irony. From http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/transportation/rules/riding.aspx
Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) provides bus service for:
Elementary school students living more than 1 mile of walking distance from school.*
Middle school students living more than 1.5 miles of walking distance from school.*
High school students living more than 2.0 miles of walking distance from school.*
Students who face hazardous walking conditions regardless of distance from school (multilane highways, construction areas, etc.) as determined by the MCPS Department of Transportation.
Students in special education, magnet, gifted/talented, and some vocational/education programs that are not offered at the student’s home school.
*A tenth of a mile may be added to establish a reasonable boundary.
In the same vein as Kimberly’s post above, I just read the interview with Mrs Meitiv on the Psychology Today website, and she says that “They also walk to and from the bus stop on school days, approximately three blocks from our house.”
I know the first time these kids were picked up the park was 1 mile from their home (HORRORS! yes, sarcasm), but wasn’t the second park 3 blocks away? So somehow, in the eyes of Montgomery County, it’s perfectly fine for kids to walk 3 blocks to the bus stop, but not 3 blocks to go to and from a park?
The mind is boggled.
As a courtesy, I read the posts directed to me. People like it when they get a response, so here goes.
1. For emphasis, supervision outside will always be more tenuous than inside. There is a rule that applies and so, I would go and change the rule. I am not sure why folks are not mounting an effort to change the rule.
2. The county official interpreted the finding. You can read what she said, Your argument with interpretation is with them.
3. Almost all of DC is not safe, according to the stats and 100% of the experiences of my friends. It is not just Anacostia, I am sorry to day. In my opinion, most of DC outside of the monuments is a no free range zone, based on the stats. You can look up the stats to see where things are better.
4. Finally, while we are still relatively safe, we are not nearly as safe, according to the stats as 30 years ago, when I got to the excellent Woodside Park section of Silver Spring.
5. The children were going the wrong way as the day ended. Shortly after they were improperly detained by police, they were hungry. They should not have been hungry and away. If the supervising child was mature enough, he would have been on his way home after sauntering around downtown Silver Spring and would have gotten his meal at home. The police should have contacted the family immediately. I am sure that contacting CPS is also part of the protocol. CPS should be able to make a decision faster than they did. It was not like these kids were in danger, the police put that note that a homeless person was eyeing them in order to make it sound worse. The fellow who was following them saw nothing out of the ordinary, except the children were dirty, which was not born out by the pictures by the way.
6. My main point remains this. The parents KNEW that this would happen again, but they sent their children out anyway. The only course of action they should have taken was to get the law changed. What are they going to do now? Send them out again? This is horrible parenting. Just the worst. Low level employees get rules to enforce and they do that. They were a little slow in doing that here, but that is the only bad part of the response. If they go out again, they will enforce the rule again. No parent should subject their child to that controversy. It causes direct harm to the child, who already had nightmares about this.
7. I am sure that someone will respond, but well, I really have nothing else to say, except please do not send your children into conflicts on a regular basis, that is a horrible thing to do to them.
Joe B. – You just said in seven different ways that children should not play outside. What is WRONG with you?
If safety is the issue, lets look at data. Statistically, the elderly are disproportionately represented in pedestrian injuries and fatalities. This may be due to their poor hearing, poor eyesight, slow reaction times, and slower mental processing. Along the lines of restricting kids, why not restrict the elderly also from being pedestrians, since statistically they are at the highest risk. Along the same lines as the arbitrary age limits for kids, lets have an arbitrary age limits for seniors of say 65. Anyone over 65 needs to accompanied by another adult when they go on a walk. If you see someone older-looking walking down the sidewalk, you can then call the cops who can question the pedestrians about their age, then take them into custody if over 65 and not accompanied.
My point is if you are going to restrict other peoples freedoms, you may want to consider that your freedoms may be next in line, and you might not like being on the other end of the stick.
Beth – I got the impression that it was the same park both times. They were stopped on the way home from the park the second time, and were 3 blocks away when stopped.
“They should not have been hungry and away.”
Are you freaking serious? Being hungry is an emergency that must be avoided at all costs?
Considering the time, they were most likely on their way home for dinner. Most people are hungry at mealtime. But I guess in our culture today, there is nothing too insignificant not to worry about and to chastise other parents for allowing.
First world problems.
Joe B.: I know you pretty much said you don’t want a reply, but as far as your #3 goes, you’re simply mistaken about the area, whatever you’ve been told about “all of D.C.” A person would have to walk a long, LONG way (far beyond normal walking distance) to get to a dodgy part of D.C. from the area we’re talking about. And I do actually know Silver Spring and Northwest D.C., not from hearsay but from plenty of experience, mostly on foot or by bike, often with a little kid in tow.
“Almost all of DC is not safe”
Almost all of the WORLD is not safe. Heck, most serious accidents involving children happen INDOORS yet I don’t see bans on children playing in homes.
When you write this drivel, and suggest Leash Laws for children who have a basic right to play outdoors, I wonder if you actually consider that children need this play to develop into capable adults, not dogs who need to be leashed and crated for *safety*.
I lost a dear friend in a murder suicide a few weeks ago. She was a victim of domestic violence and now 3 children are orphans. Our community was rocked a few years ago by a murder suicide where the father killed his own children and wife violently. If you really looked hard at statistics, kids playing outside, walking to parks, even past Hell’s Accountants, are truly the least of our worries.
It’s what happens behind closed doors to children and families that should concern you.
I don’t know why I’m bothering to respond to someone who doesn’t want to actually engage in conversation, but this:
“Almost all of DC is not safe, according to the stats and 100% of the experiences of my friends.”
is just silly. As someone who has lived/worked in DC for 14 years I have not had any experience that would lead me to conclude that all of DC is unsafe. Now, there might be some extra precautions I would encourage kids to take, but that has more to do with traffic and the bizarre configuration of certain streets. But if you really think that, say, Friendship Heights is an unsafe place to be, then boy you have lived one sheltered existence.
Whoever is telling you that almost all of DC is unsafe must be overly paranoid. My dad lived outside DC for most of my childhood so I’ve visited frequently and I’ve never felt unsafe. There are certainly areas that you want to stay away from but the whole city is not some cesspool. The kid and I are heading up in May in fact for her first visit.
Perhaps Joe B and his friends haven’t been to DC in a heck of a long time. Or perhaps they never got out of their cars. But I had to respond to this because I think this notion that DC, NYC, LA, etc are not safe, for adults, let alone children, is the true underpinning of an enormous amount of disapproval of free range. But it isn’t reality.
I’m about as vulnerable as anyone. I am a woman on the cusp of dwarfism. When I moved to the DC area I weighed less than 100lbs. I also have old injuries that make me occasionally fall down for no good reason. And despite all that, I have gone about the city and suburbs of the city (including Silver Spring) day and night, on foot, on bike, and by public transit, with and without accompaniment. I have been doing that for longer than Rafi Meitiv has been alive. And in all that time I have seen exactly one crime in progress. A case of domestic violence which was interrupted by a bystander. The last time I took a fall in DC 3 people rushed to help me up and gather and return the electronics I dropped. When I rode the metro on crutches, during rush hour, a seat was readily offered and people cleared a path to the seat. When I exited the subway people positioned themselves around me on the escalators to protected me from falling. I couldn’t have gotten more help at a family reunion. I have never even had a threatening encounter in the DC area, and if anyone could look like a soft target, it would be me.
I’ve done NYC, LA, Seattle, San Diego, Oakland, Honolulu, Indianapolis, and more on foot and mass transit. And not only has nothing happened to me. The only seemingly threatening incident turned out awesome. I boarded a bus, in a “bad” neighborhood, that white people didn’t enter, and immediately made it obvious I had no idea how to get where I wanted to go. Getting an I’m not a tour guide response from the driver, I boarded anyhow. Someone said “you have a lot of nerve, girl!” and leaned in to ask “Are you scared?” I gave everyone a good calm look, and answered honestly “No, I see no one to be scared of.” The bus erupted in relieved laughter and everyone wanted to talk to me and help me out.
People really need to get over the idea that urban=dangerous. Yes there are areas with gang problems, that I’m not going to hang around in. But look at the cost of rent or houses in George Town or Dupont Circle areas of DC. People don’t pay those prices to hunker down in fear. They pay that, because those are good places to live.
All this “DC is not safe” stuff reminds me of the time when one of my elected representatives, who looked like a retired jockey, jumped out of his chauffeured car during a DC snowstorm to help push the car in front out of a snow-rut. That’s what you do in Alaska: if the driver ahead of you obviously needs help, you don’t waste time with stupid questions, you just put your back into it and push before the snow-rut gets worse. The driver of that car behaved as though he were being attacked!
Sometimes danger is in the mind of the beholder.
Jenny Islander, that is really sad about the driver being scared of your representative. They must be scared of a lot of people, because there are lots of people inside the DC beltway who will help others out of a snow rut. Thankfully the only two vehicles in sight when my husband and I got stuck, in an ice storm, while I was in labor, contained such people. But I wasn’t surprised, let alone scared. I’ve spent enough time on foot in this city to know that if there are people near by, there is help near by.
@Havva: Anybody’s guess where Scaredy Driver was from.
I had a similar issue when I went to college in Connecticut. There were a lot of people there who lived in New England and drove little putt-putt cars (or expensive jellybean cars) to NYC to work. No clearance, no weight, no tires to speak of…so I helped somebody out of a really pathetic little gutter and she reacted as though I were trying to jack her car. She was fishtailing like mad and going nowhere, so I got her to roll down her window. She’d lived in Middletown for two years and hadn’t so much as put a shovel in the trunk…just budgeted extra money for a towing service. Honestly, some people.
I figured out later why she had looked at me as if I were trying to steal her silly little Datsun. It was the same reason people in downtown Middletown gave me the side-eye. The only people in that entire burg who dressed like me, i.e., hard-wearing outer clothing intended for lousy winter weather, were the homeless men who begged on the street!
Joe B., you sound like a person who craves attention, as evidenced by your trolling of this website. At best, you seem to be an unthinking, tyrannous automaton. When police are policing the streets, they are required judgment – something you seem to be in scant supply of. Sound judgment was not applied in this case.
Re ‘neighborhood must be without businesses’: I thought those places were called “food deserts”?
@Jenny Islander,
Well that explains why people find me surprisingly unflappable. Hard wearing outerwear is something I associate with tradesmen. Layers of smelly, ill fitted clothing, and prevalent grime are how I identify homeless people. That is quite distinct from a chemical sent, and delineated wipe or splatter patterns that appear on a workman’s clothing. When I looked around the bus in the ‘bad’ neighborhood I was seeing such clothing and going… okay, paint splatters (painter), mortar (brick layer), tar(road crew), scorch marks (welder), etc.
I figured out work men’s clothing from my free-range childhood spent seeking and interrogating every workman in the neighborhood. They were gruff, but awesome. I can’t imagine mistaking such people for homeless and unstable.
Does he know that kids are capable of asking to use someone’s cell phone if they run into trouble? I certainly would hesitate to give a 10-year-old a cell phone because they tend to lose things at that age and phones are expensive.
When I was a child waaaay long ago, there were no cell phones. Somehow, I survived. Back then, people were primarily afraid of the Russians launching a nuclear attack and hippies blowing up draft offices. The fear of strange men in white vans was decades in the future. I miss those simpler times.
@Michelle tells us the children were outside an accounting firm. The horror! Accounting firms are filthy pits of depravity. No decent parent would allow their precious children near one.
CPS really should change its initials to CYA, ’cause that’s what they try to do.
Lenore, 10 points if you find the mistake this article made in the sentence that mentions you! 😀
http://www.nrcreader.nl/artikel/8520/een-kind-alleen-op-straat-bel-911
Today I ran some errands and saw two boys of 6-7 play soccer on the street, an L-shaped and therefore very quiet neighborhood street. Later on I cycled through a woonerf (naughty me, it’s not meant for through traffic) and came across a boy and girl, no older than 4 or 5, also kicking a ball. 🙂
Joe B
Here’s an idea–if you’d like to parent children a certain way, find a woman desperate enough to be with you and create children with her. You can then proceed to parent those children, your children, your way. The rest of us don’t give a hump what others like you think of our parenting, because you’re not our father, and thank the skies for that.
LRH