Take Our Children to the Park…And Let Them Walk Home by Themselves Day: SAT, MAY 9

My kids do this several times a day since one park is right on the corner and another is about three blocks away… Maybe they need a bigger challenge. 🙂

I’m completely behind the free range kids idea. My OH wasn’t that happy about our eldest son going very far from the bit of street outside our house til he was 8yrs old. Since then I’ve managed to persuade him into the Free Range way of thinking. My criteria for letting him go a bit further were things like: does he know our address and phone number, what do do in an emergency ie phone 999, never go off with a stranger, other basics like that.

My question to other parents is this: do you feel there are essential things like these that your child should know before you leave them at the park and let them walk home alone?

The reason I ask is that I have a 7.5 yr old daughter who struggles to remember our address, no chance with the phone number and is just one of those kids who learns more slowly in general and ‘accidentally’ forgets the rules a lot. Whereas my son was more than ready by her age to get more freedom or walk to school. I’m not sure it’s fair to put the responsibility of ‘looking after’ her onto him (he’s still only 8).

Becks x

Anne,
What is your point? I fail to see how this has anything to do with child safety or the Free Range Kids movement at all.

These offenders have served their time. They are usually the type to not commit a similiar crime.
Whether they live in this shelter, another shelter or in their own home, it is only where they live. Really this changes nothing for anyone, unless you like awake at night worrying about the worst case scenario for your kid. But really, these offenders existed before you even knew where they were living. It is not like they just appeared out of nowhere.

Anne, thank you for your concern about children and for your interest in the rights of those who have served their sentences and are having difficulties transitioning into a law-abiding society. Halfway homes and shelters are so often the only options that registered citizens have. The Bellvue Men’s Shelter was there serving the needs of this population before the day care and the school opened. It is a shame that people see only the negative in this situation. It is foolish to believe that they are there so they can watch kids. They were there before the kids. This is a very complex issue, but if everyone will become educated of all the factors involved and look at the facts and research, we will have moved a step closer to maximizing rehabilitation for those who need it and therefore will increase public safety for everyone.

My kids’ll be at the park with bells on. The good news is that in my area police don’t seem too keen on harassing kids that are out and about. I live about 50 feet from a very busy street, on a street full of apartments, with a registered sex offender (convicted of lewd and lascivious acts with a child under 14) living right across the street in a duplex.

In fact, last year when my son was 9, a police officer caught him outside on the sidewalk practicing on the new pogo stick he got for Christmas and gave him a sticker for bouncing over 50 times in a row.

Very true, Lisa. It also gives the impression that if we could just monitor all those on the registry adequately, our children would be safe from that sort of harm. This is arguably the greatest harm that a public registry does. The truth is that virtually all sexual abuse of children and teens is committed by those close to them in their everyday lives, those they trust and often even love: their relatives, their peers, and their authority figures. The “stranger” molestations can be around 5 or 6% for teens, but very few of those are already on the registry. We need a totally different type of system, one based on facts and evidence, one focusing on victims, education, awareness, and prevention.

Anne,

Sorry but you need to take it down a couple of notches. You act like all the offenders in the place are standing at the windows drooling with their pecker in their hands. LMAO!!!!!!!!!!

Do I see these people as a threat to the kids in the schools…………….not at all. Then again, I have never once checked the SOR. I won’t even do it to prove a point.

Becks,

I didn’t make sure my kids memorized our phone number and address before I let them out to play. Maybe I should have, but honestly there are so many things a parent has to remember to do that I didn’t get around to that until my 8yo son lost track of us at the zoo. We found him quickly, but he was upset that he didn’t know how to reach us, so I made sure everyone learned our cell phone numbers.

Tip for teaching your phone number: sing it to the tune of the Mickey Mouse song! You know, the one that goes: “M-I-C, K-E-Y, M-O-U-S-E!” Sing it like this:

5-5-5, 1-2-3, 4-5-6-7! Mommy’s phone. Mommy’s phone. Whenever you need help call Mommy’s phone!

However, more important than knowing the address is knowing how to get to the house. How to navigate the neighborhood. How to ask for help if necessary. MOST important is knowing that you can trust her to follow the rules. That she won’t walk out in front of a car, or go off with a stranger, and that she’ll come home when she’s meant to. If she can’t do that, she can’t go out alone.

Ha ha! I love adding “and have them walk home by themselves.”

Still want to hear about the “leave your kids in the car while you run a quick errand” day.

In the shade, with the windows down, people. And I guess AZ, TX, NM and all those states where it’s too dangerous need not apply.

Lenore

Like it or not, you’re leading a small revolution. I’m sure that there are times when you think, “I’d love to trade some of this popularity for a bit more financial security.”

Kenny made a great comment. …..I think a FRK Bracelet for our FRKids is in order. Proceeds going to promoting of FREE RANGE KIDS and all of us losing our freedom… FRK Bracelets could be personalized with phone # or address. Or to promote May 9th Freedom day for all.

There are other ideas as well. Why not partner up with an owner of a camp site or private school?

I wish you’d put a ‘donate’ button on your blog. There was/is a demand to donate on the Meitvis website. Many of us know that if it wasn’t for you, the Meitvis would never have been on TV and not much in the paper either. If they would be on TV, it would have been a story about how neglectful they are.

You are a big reason for this change in pubic opinion.

@ Kenny — LOL! Just today I was thinking that FR shirts might be in order. A red t-shirt with white lettering in the front that says “I’m Not Lost…” and on the back says “I’m Free Range”.

@ Michelle — When my children were younger and had a hard time with phone numbers (especially a few years ago when changing phones or plans usually meant getting a new number) and we’d go someplace super public (like an amusement park), I would use a pen and write my cell number on their forearms. That way if they got lost coming back from a bathroom or turned the wrong way coming back from a ride, they could go into any store and have them call me.

Lenore,

Canada and it’s provinces have had a long standing program about getting active. They have a new program called “Make Room For Play” it is about how screen time is taking away play time. They have videos on youtube, that are their TV ads. They show kids outside playing, no adults around, and the screen gradually shrinks. Then their Pariticipaction name comes up with “Don’t visit our website.”

Thought this fits in nice.

Chris and parents in similiar geographical situations,

If I may suggest. Drive em to any park of your choosing. Drop em off, and enjoy an afternoon of adult time with the better half.

In Kingston, I suggest parents take their kids downtown to the waterfront and let them explore the boardwalk that connects parks, kiosks, restaurants and lots of friendly people.

My kids are all beyond playing in the park. One is a teacher, the other two are 16. On this day, the two 16 yr olds are not going to the park. Instead, they are being given the list, the money and they are doing the house’s grocery shopping. Me, I’ll cook when they bring it home.

@Warren–I’ve seen the Participaction and Body Break ads on TV, because I’m Canadian too. I haven’t seen the “Don’t visit our website” one, but I think that’s pretty funny, and appropriate. Anyway, I like what those ads are trying to promote, but I’ve been thinking for a while, it’d be cool if TV had physical activity breaks instead of commercials. So, during a break in the show, someone would come on screen and lead a simple Zumba routine, or a yoga Sun Salutation on each side, or challenge viewers to count how many jumping jacks they can do in a certain amount of time, and text in their answer. The physical activity breaks could be sponsored by certain companies, but not companies that manufacture junk food or alcohol. Participaction and Body Break have the right idea, because yes, people are supposed to get 30-60 minutes of physical activity every day, but that’s simply not feasible for a lot of families. Maybe they can’t afford gym memberships, and the nearest YMCA (they charge on a sliding scale in cases of financial hardship) is out of reach for them, because they don’t have reliable transportation. Maybe they don’t live in a safe neighbourhood. Maybe the parents work late, and don’t want their kids going out alone while they’re not home. Maybe, on top of all of this, they live in a climate where it’s WINTER six months of the year……you know, like Canada. So, all of a sudden, the “Make sure you get 30-60 minutes of physical activity per day!!!” edict from the annoyingly perky man and woman standing in a park on a beautiful spring day, in their brightly-coloured shell suits, circa 1993, isn’t so easy. But, I think that, if the media tried to become part of the solution, instead of just being part of the problem, it could work for some people. Not everyone would do every exercise, but it’d be worth it for those who did follow along.

I don’t know how many Michigan residents are here, but I would suggest that they not bother to call their local police. Michigan’s abuse/neglect statutes are exceedingly vague and I doubt you will get a useful answer if you call and ask.

@Anne, only a small minority of registered sex offenders have committed *either* an offense of any type against a child 13 or under OR a forcible offense against a person of any age OR more than one offense of any type. The vast majority have committed either a single victimless offense or a single non-forcible statutory offense with a post-pubescent teen (usually within a year of the age of consent in that state).

In many states, a 19 year old who has intercourse with a willing 15 year old girlfriend will be classed as a Level 3 sex offender. A 20 year old who responded to a Craigslist ad to meet with a 19 year old for sex, who then, in a follow-up e-mail, claims that “she” is really 15 but still wants to meet, will be classed as a Level 2 sex offender. These are realistically a better chance of what the “most dangerous” offenders they are talking about have done than that they’ve molested or raped small children.

One thing we need to realize is how severely we punish sexual abuse of children at this point, and that many states of civil commitment. People who actually molest children–especially if the assault is perpetrated on a stranger and if intercourse or sodomy is involved–are locked up for a VERY long time, and often civilly committed indefinitely after that. These are increasingly people who will never, ever be free again. The people the registry was designed to protect the public from–people who have sexually assaulted pre-pubescent children or forcibly sexually assaulted minors of any age–are increasingly being subjected to criminal and civil penalties that mean they will never see the light of day again. So the registry increasingly is a list of men who, often in their late teens or twenties, made a really big mistake about sex with a willing post-pubescent teen (either in real life or online), as well as teens and children who get on the registry for offenses against other teen or children.

Whatever we think the criminal penalties for that should be, the vast majority post no threat to children playing in a park. A 21 year old guy who would have sex–or consider having sex–with a 15 year old teen girl who says she is willing and eager to do so is no more likely to molest and/or abduct a 9 year old at the park than anybody in the general public. He just is not. That’s like saying that because a 40 year old man might be willing to have sex with an 18 year old who was into it, he would also kidnap and rape a 16 year old. That’s not how it works.

Way to go, Lenore!!!

@Anne,
You are mistaken if you think that free-range parents don’t care, or don’t think sexual crimes are a threat. I know it sounds otherwise to you, because everyone is reverting to the facts they know that help them keep the sex offender registry in perspective. But from my experience with this community, not only do the regulars here care, I’m not the only free-range parent who was molested as a kid.

We certainly believe in protecting our children, as it is obvious you do. But we go about it differently. We protect them by teaching them not to be afraid of talking to people, even strangers. So they have every source of help if they are in need. But at the same time we teaching them not to go off with strangers. And we protect them by teaching them “the 3 R’s.” To recognize, resist, and report abuse. I too would rather avoid the need for the 3R’s and hope they never come up in my daughter’s life.

But here is the rub. If we are completely afraid of letting our kids roam, we might be able to protect them from less than 10% of the sex offenders. The ones who prey on strangers (and most of those are just flashers)… but in the process we increase their exposure to, and risk putting them under the control of, the other 90%+ of the sex offenders: the ones who pray on the children they know, and those predators are more likely to be rapists. Look again at the article you posted. The two worst offenders, the ones scary enough to profile, got their victims by offering child care! A babysitter, and someone claiming to run a camp. They are part of the 90%+. So are other horrific cases that fade faster from the mind and the media than a kidnapping, people like like Ashley Dack.

Would you trade some of your best childhood memories, riding bikes, playing in creeks, or whatever it is you did, to be ‘safe’ in the ‘care’ of such people? I wouldn’t. I wouldn’t even trade it in to be safe from my uncle.

The standard thing, supported by the police, the school system, and everyone else, when I was kid was stranger danger. They all drilled in the ‘stranger danger’ rules. They promised, or seemed to promise, that the adults I knew, and my family would always protect me. But sadly it doesn’t work like that, and worse most of them knew. The school’s sexual abuse psychologist gave us just half a hint of the truth with a single emphasis on the word “anyone.” That was all the warning I had to make sense of what happened to me. And it made me feel like the whole lot of them, wouldn’t believe me, and were powerless to help. I could have stopped him… but I felt alone and powerless.

So I can’t play the modern variants of ‘stranger danger’ and ‘I’ll protect you’ at an even louder volume, and pretend it will protect my daughter. I’m doing what no one had the honesty to do for me, and telling the complicated, painful, but also hopeful truth. “Bad guys don’t run around looking like the Joker. Most bad guys are more like Prince Hans. They look and act like good guys, until they hurt someone.” My daughter calls them “secret bad guys” and we talk about their tricks, lies, and secrets. And we tell her that such a “secret bad guy” could even trick mom and dad, and be friends with mom and dad. But that it is important to tell if she discovers a “secret bad guy.” Because, good people want to fight bad people, and there are so many good people, that the truth is the most powerful weapon against a secret bad guy, the one they all fear.

Havva – What you wrote was beautiful and inspiring. Have you ever considered writing a book? There are so many depressing ones out there that paint sexual abuse as leaving the “victim” permanently damaged. What you wrote is very empowering to others who may have experienced what you did or for those who care about them and want to help. And your insights into how to truly empower kids to to be safe should be taught to all kids. I love your story of “secret bad guys” and enlisting the kids’ help in unmasking those “secret bad guys” in case they’ve fooled their parents. You could even turn that into a children’s book all on its own.

Havva, so well put! I’ve wondered how I can let my children know that it’s not necessarily strangers we need to be wary of without putting them in position where they don’t feel they can trust our relatives and friends or people in authority but the ‘secret bad guy’ is exactly right. I’ve told them that if someone does something they feel is wrong then they shouldn’t keep it a secret and even if they feel they can’t tell me then they must tell an adult they trust.

Michelle, thank you for your advice. That mickey mouse song certainly is catchy. And you’re right to have the emphasis on following the rules. I think I’ll use the summer to practice smaller freedoms like walking round the block with her brother and see if we can build up that trust on following rules and once she’s 8 in winter we’ll be closer to being ready. It’s much darker through winter anyway so there won’t be as much chance for getting out and about.

Oh, I forgot one. I think that teenagers and adults should get a Sign Up To Volunteer For The Organization Of Your Choice With No Background Checks And Accompanying Hostility Day.

I see that the FRK facebook page contains the usual “thanks for advertising pedophile day” comments. Sigh.

God willing these free range kids will be ok. With the odd chance one of them doesn’t make it home who do the parents call? The free range parents association? Let’s watch how they would spin that.

@Emily, I was being sarcastic too, sort of. If you read any of the library threads on this site though, you’ll see how many people, even free-range, have issues with kids in the library not being watched like a hawk.

While I do think that kids need some freedom, range depending on the age, our kids are safer these days because so much awareness has been brought to the subject over the last couple of decades. What you are doing with this day is setting back everything we have learned.

Teach your kids to be responsible. Adjust the amount of freedom they have according to age. Let them play outside in their neighborhood if its a safe place for them to be and they are enough to be responsible with their own safety.

DO NOT set up a day where you are giving everyone permission to take their kids and throw them out in a local park with no supervision. Why? First because there are soooooooooooo many irresponsible people out there that will do this without thinking about whether or not their kids are capable of, or old enough, to be on their own. “Hey, I saw that on FB so it must be ok.” Second, as much as some of you downplay the role of a sexual predator on this thread, they are still a threat and now you have given them a day to be out trolling, looking fore these kids. No, they aren’t all serious offenders, but NO the serious offenders are not all given long sentences, and some have not been caught yet. Think about that.. they aren’t a registered sex offender if they have not been caught yet. Third, how many police stations will have to be put on some kind of alert because of these organized toss your kids out day? And finally, because some people will not check with those local police stations and will be setting themselves up to be arrested and possibly have their kids taken away.

If you want to educate, educate. Setting up a day like this is irresponsible at the very least, dangerous at worst. If even one kids gets hurt, or worse, will it be worth it?

While I understand your group’s wish for your kids to safely do what kids should do, I have concerns. We all want our kids to have normal, safe childhoods where they can play and just be kids. How is registering with your group to find other “free range” kids in the same area NOT a potential lure for those seeking out kids who are unsupervised? I can’t help but feel this effort is misguided. In these times you just can’t afford to let 7-10 year olds roam without supervision, and you certainly don’t give others a veritable map to find those that are allowed to. One may be confident in the capabilities of their child, and realize they were overconfident, too late. You only have one chance…protect your kids.

@Warren–I agree with what you said. Obviously, there’s a minimum level of age and maturity required for a child to play independently in the park, and for kids who aren’t there yet, this day could be “take your kids to the park, stay with them, but sit on a park bench and let them play on their own, under loose supervision” day.

Diane,

You really should proof read what you write. You accuse me of not being open to your side, and you come back with “One kid placed in harms way is too many, and all predators are a threat that our children must be protected from.”. That is such an absolute statement, with no room for any discussion.

So going by your logic, that promoting this event is dangerous to the welfare of the kids that participate, because they are just lining up to be fed to the predators, then we must never promote or advertise anything for children. People should not post birthday parties at any location, schools should not advertise open houses, fairs or special events. Towns should not promote or advertise children’s summer camps, and so on.

Diane please start getting your information and data from credible sources and not Law and Order SVU, Criminal Minds and CSI marathons.

@ Diana

“…the kids are meant to also walk home, unsupervised. No group there.” Friend, neighbor, sibling? Just because they aren’t supervised by an adult doesn’t mean they are alone.

“All I know is that I have worked with various missing children’s groups, searchers, LE and families, for years..”
Then you ought to know that roughly 96% of missing persons are runaways. Per pollyklass.org “between 1.6-2.8 million youth runaway each year in the United States. Children can begin running as young as ages 10-14.”

Have you ever talked to a run away? Do you understand what makes them so desperate? Lots of them come from absolutely awful circumstances that we can’t fix. But they also come from well meaning, but neurotic parents, that won’t let them grow up.

I had a friend have a total break down when I got hurt on her trampoline. She was certain that her parents would take way the only physical outlet that was available to her at a moment’s notice. I covered for her… as she grew there were a lot of us covering for her in different ways. She hung in just to adult hood. When the rest of us went away to college, the restrictions go to be too much. She staged her own disappearance. Early in high school I discovered that a girl, who I had been friends with when we were younger, was despondent and had been slitting her wrists. There were scars upon scars, up and down her wrists. I asked her why, and she told me because “my parents won’t let me do anything.” She lived just a few blocks from me. I biked past her house frequently. I swam just down the street from her house. I didn’t know she was in there, lonely, suffering all that time.

Sometimes children are kidnapped by their parent’s fears.

Ok, I give up.. My point was the recklessness of advertising a day where children will be left unsupervised. We’ve gotten off to runaways and criminal minds.

@Havva, yes I have spoken to a runaway. I have been involved in the search of several runaways. I have worked more extensively with missing children and I have seen first hand how devastating it is. The aftermath of a child killed by a predator is beyond words.

One final mention, @Warren.. I actually have been working with missing children’s organizations for years. I do know the facts.

One final mention, @Warren.. I actually have been working with missing children’s organizations for years. I do know the facts.

I’m not Warren, but I have a pretty good idea of what he’d say. Diana, you work with missing children’s organizations. You know the facts about missing children–you know how many children go missing in any given location (not sure where you’re from), in any given time period, and it probably seems like a pretty high number. However, what you don’t see is the many, many MORE children (more in previous generations, but still a few these days), who make it to and from the park, or school, or the library, or the 7-11, or wherever they’re going that day, completely unharmed. You also don’t see the personal growth that this provides for children–you don’t see the value they get in being trusted to just be in the world as their own people, to be home on time, to remember “a loaf of bread, a container of milk, a stick of buttah” for their mothers (old-school Sesame Street reference).

On the flip side, you don’t see how stunted children become when they’re denied these simple rites of passage. That’s because “Johnny and Susie went to the park on Saturday, and came home perfectly fine” isn’t the kind of thing that makes the news. There has been a lot of talk about the obesity crisis, and about how too much screen time is bad for kids, but the “solution” is a never-ending parade of structured activities, and not everyone has the time, money, or inclination for that, so the lower-income kids, the introverted kids, and the kids with parents whose work schedules preclude driving them to activities, do without, when 20 or 30 years ago, they’d be playing in the park. You see all those missing children in your line of work, and you start to think of how awful it would be if YOUR child were to go missing, so you instinctively become more protective. It’s understandable, but it’s still not healthy. A better thing to do would be to remind yourself that the missing children make up a very small percentage of all children, and then…….send your child to the park, if he or she is ready. Yes, I know that a lot of infrastructure doesn’t support free-ranging (no sidewalks, schools and other kid-oriented places located far from the suburbs, et cetera), but until Lenore declares “Install Sidewalks Everywhere And Make The Suburbs More Walkable Day,” the best thing we can do is to be as free-range as possible, according to what’s feasible right now. Teach kids to keep themselves safe, by not going off with strangers, and everything will probably be fine–not certainly, because nobody can promise that, but if you keep children inside and supervised until they’re eighteen, that doesn’t prevent trouble; it just postpones it.

>>You should know that because you worked in these groups you views are jaded, just like those of police officers, ER doctors and nurses, and therapists. You are jaded because you only see the situation when it has gone bad, not the millions of others that went off without a hitch.<<

Okay, yeah, that's pretty much what I was trying to say. Thanks, Warren. 🙂

Diane,

I guess we should be flattered that you think this event is going to flood parks around the country with kids.
On the other hand we should also be concerned for you, that you believe there are predators that are going to use this to snatch up kids. You only hear from the victims. As sad as their tales are, you cannot act on their side of the story. You need the attackers point of view before you can do anything. Only the one that commits the offense can tell you their motive, how they pulled it off, how long it was planned, and so on. The victim cannot tell you any of that.

You also need to realize that just because you believe something, does not make it fact. There are not predators out there marking the day on the calendar like it is some sort of Boxing Day Sale for deviants. Why would they do that when between now and then they have dozens if not hundreds of victims to choose from? Answer is they wouldn’t. Also, you know almost every victim is at the hands of a family member or those trusted by the family. Therefore the vast majority of predators/attackers do not need a special event day to victimize a child. Everything we know about sexual abuse, abuse and abductions says this event is safe. Those are facts.

“location — probably more than every before since its being so widely talked about.”

Really? Because I spend all day every day at work on the internet and THIS is the only place I’ve seen this talked about. Maybe she’s mentioned it on Reason or one of the other places that Lenore regularly writes and I haven’t seen it, but it isn’t exactly being advertised during the Super Bowl or anything.

As for locations, there are approximately 25 playgrounds in my town of 100,000 alone and my town is one of millions in the country. The odds of the already extremely rare stranger kidnapper happening to be in the vicinity of a town where kids are participating and guess the right park AND that the chosen park has no other people who just happen to be around on a pretty Saturday morning is so minuscule as to completely meaningless.

“That is the reckless part.”

You still haven’t explained the reckless part of this. What is it that you envision happening here?

“they are there and I truly believe that they look for opportunities. Its a fact.”

Do you truly believe or is it a fact? Either way, I guess I’m not sure why you are so convinced that there is some lack of opportunity every day that makes this day somehow special. It is unlikely that we will participate in this event because we have other plans, but if we were, my child plays unsupervised in the exact same park we would go to all the time. So do a bunch of other kids. In fact, it is SWARMING with kids EVERY nice Saturday morning because it is in the same park as the Farmer’s Market – a Farmer’s Market that is advertised in every local newspaper and radio station (unlike Lenore’s day). Were I so inclined, I could have kidnapped 3 kids waiting alone at bus stops this morning and every other school morning since August and I only traveled a mile. I can pass any school in the county at dismissal time on any given school day and find children walking home alone. I could have snatched enough unsupervised children to field a few baseball teams from the bike race I attended on Friday and Saturday. Halloween is my neighborhood’s Christmas – also well known locally – so there are hundreds of kids milling around, some supervised and some not.

And, let’s face it, these are all the same kids. A parent who is too afraid to allow her child to walk to school is not leaving the child in the park alone on Saturday no matter how many places this is advertised. The same kids who will be unsupervised in the park are wandering around their own neighborhoods, playing in the same parks and walking to school alone every day. Why is this day so special? Why would a predator need to wait until this day to take the same children he could take on a random Tuesday if so inclined? This would actually be the WORST day as there will hopefully be numbers of kids out and about and not just one solitary kid playing in the park.

Ok, so I am completely wrong.. I don’t know anything.. I have no facts and I didn’t see this (and find this site as a result) any place but here, oh and a national news broadcast where the day in question was being discussed with a former police officer-prosecutor- now currently a judge, who is totally on the same page I am. But hey, I’m sure he doesn’t know the facts either. He only puts non-existent pedophiles and predators behind bars. I wanted to know more so I looked.. I had an opinion so I replied..

Sorry for leaving a reply (in the box that says to leave a reply but does not say “only if you agree”) in the first place. Obviously no one wants hear differing opinions.

@Diane: The fact that people don’t agree with you means that they don’t agree with you. That’s it.

Diana,

You are welcome. So glad you have finally seen the light. Good for you………………..and all that other crap.

Again, you are watching a judge comment on TV. And of course the station didn’t pick the judge because of his point of view. And since when does being a judge make one a parenting expert? How many judges do you know get to see people on the best day or even just a normal day of their life, in the judges official capacity? They don’t, they see them on the worst days of their lives. People with those careers in which they only see the worst, get jaded. Brainwashed into thinking life is like that all the time.

Diana when you can actually come up with facts, reason and proof that this is a bad idea we will listen. Up until now it has only been irrational fear, and fantasy.

Another thing–even if the parks were, theoretically, swarming with predators (which they aren’t), most predators just look like perfectly ordinary adults, who would conceivably call the police if they saw another adult trying to harm a child, or lure them away. So, let’s suppose that Herbert The Pervert went to the park with the intention of kidnapping some random child off the monkey bars. If every other pervert in town had the same idea, because it’s Leave Your Kid At The Park Day, they’d all arrive at the park, see each other, and abort mission.

“most predators just look like perfectly ordinary adults”

No! No! No! They’re shifty-eyed and they wear trenchcoats!

@Diana: Oops, spelt your name wrong.

@Diana, all that big wall of text told us is that some predators find some children regardless of them being at a park somewhere in the world on May 9.

You’re really not able to explain the recklessness of all the other markers of where children might be, are you? (Schools, libraries, museums, McDonalds, swingsets, bike racks……..)

Diana –

Let me try this one more time —

You came here specifically stating that Lenore is reckless for creating Take Our Children to the Park Day. You do not appear to oppose free range children in general. In fact your first comment started with “While I do think that kids need some freedom, range depending on the age ….” Apparently being in the park unsupervised any of the other 364 days of the year is perfectly fine with you. You oppose creating a specific day for it.

However, you still – many posts and lots of random facts that have nothing to do with the issue at hand later – have yet to articulate a single reason for the notion that children playing in the park THIS day is reckless while playing in the exact same park at the exact same time the other 364 days a year is acceptable. You have yet to articulate a single reason why knowledge gained from the national news is somehow superior than knowledge gained from living in a neighborhood and paying attention to what goes on. You have yet to articulate a single reason why knowing that some children may be in completely unidentified parks somewhere in the US unsupervised at 10am on May 9 is somehow more valuable than knowing that kids definitely are walking unsupervised at 7:15am along a specific route between a specific neighborhood and a specific school pretty much every weekday between August and June.

Once you are able to answer those questions, we can begin a dialog. Otherwise you are just throwing out meaningless facts that have nothing to do with the questions that you have raised which makes us believe that you have absolutely no basis whatsoever for your opinion and it is simply an irrational fear.

@Diana,
I do hope you will give consideration to this response. Looking back, on your prior remarks, and closely at your most recent. I do think you mostly get the point. Despite your reaction to this one event.

That the crime rate against children is falling at about the same speed as the crime rate as adults suggests that the cause is not because the children are being locked up at an alarming rate. But that the cause is the very things that are alarming you… that the criminals (of all kinds) are getting caught at a higher rate. Which is to me exciting and good news.
We have discussion that phenomena on this sight most recently here:
https://www.freerangekids.com/theres-never-been-a-safer-time-to-be-a-kid-in-america-washington-post/
and here:
https://www.freerangekids.com/this-isnt-news-d-c-suburb-posts-lowest-crime-rate-in-its-statistical-history/

You say “We teach then safety.. we practice safety. The nature (or number) of deviants has not changed, we are just more prepared, act more quickly, prepare better, and make better choices.” I think that is exactly right. I want awareness, I want to prepare my kid. I don’t want to go back to the days of sweeping crimes against children under the rug. And as someone who was molested in the usual way (by family) I don’t want this focus on stranger danger to continue telling kids, like it told me, that they were a freak and wouldn’t be believed because my attacker was one of the people all the adults told me would never hurt me and would protect me from those ‘dangerous strangers’.

I agree that a kid who survives a kidnapping is injured physically, emotionally, and more. And I think they have a steep road to recovery. But I do believe in their ability to heal. I also don’t think that risk is high enough to structure my child’s entire life around a 50 or 150 out of 74.2 MILLION risk. In fact I think doing that could put them in the hands of people who might do similar damage, just without kidnapping them. It also would involve a lot more time in the car, where intense trauma and death by car accidents are a multiple times a day deadly occurrence. It doesn’t pay to fixate on one risk and loose sight of how that fixation increases the other risks.

” The first three hours are the most critical when trying to locate a missing child. The murder of an abducted child is rare, and an estimated 100 cases in which an abducted child is murdered occur in the U.S. each year. A 2006 study indicated that 76.2 percent of abducted children who are killed are dead within three hours of the abduction.”
And when I was little the police wouldn’t accept a missing persons report until I had been missing for longer than that. (I was reported missing, due to communication errors twice). So clearly data has been used to improve practices, and I’m glad of that.

“The National Center for Missing & Exploited Children has assisted law enforcement in the recovery of more than 205,550 missing children since it was founded in 1984. Our recovery rate for missing children has grown from 62 percent in 1990 to 97 percent today.”
That is wonderful news, congratulations to the NCMEC, to our police forced, to you, and to others like you who do the hard work of making sure missing children are rescued.

“The AMBER Alert program was created in 1996 and is operated by the U.S. Department of Justice. As of March 2015, 758 children have been successfully recovered as a result of the program.”
I’ve seen it at work in my area since I got my smart phone. All but one case, so far, have been familial abductions, and all but one has come home safe. Thank goodness, and good work. The one that didn’t… well that was a national news horror story because the mom handed the kid over to the abductor, and covered for the abductor until the school demanded a welfare check, and demanded the AMBER Alert over the mother’s objections. I’m not sure anything could have saved that girl from her mom’s complicity.

” U.S. law enforcement agencies have seen a dramatic increase in cases of sexual exploitation of children since the 1990s. According to a report to Congress in 2010.”
That’s funny, I’ve seen a dramatic increase in child supervision in exactly that time. You seem to be arguing that supervision makes kids safer. But most of the worst offenders violated kids in their care. So once again I’m looking back at my argument of the law of unintended consequences. Could it be that our effort to protect kids from the rare stranger is putting them at the mercy of the run of the mill pedophile who preys on children they know? And further that far more of these situations are cause by forcing supervision on capable children, than are prevented?

” In 2006 U.S. attorneys handled 82.8 percent more child pornography cases than they had in 1994.” The internet does make these guys easier to see, and easier to track. Just like on line bullying leaves evidence that in person bullying doesn’t. I’m glad the creeps are getting caught.

” State and local law enforcement agencies involved in Internet Crimes Against Children Task Forces reported a 230 percent increase in the number of documented complaints of online enticement of children from 2004 to 2008.” Wow… when my friends were solicited on-line, none of us thought to tell an adult. Of course none of us felt threatened by it either… just knew it was time to get out of that forum…which was always an adult forum the kid shouldn’t have really been in anyhow.

” ICAC Task Forces noted a more than 1,000 percent increase in complaints of child sex trafficking from 2004 to 2008.”
And what has happened to the rate of actual substantiated cases? We have worked up a huge moral crusade, and put a lot of money on this topic. And of course the crime is real and horrific. But for all the effort, I haven’t seen much in the way of results. Has trafficking increased, or just the reporting? How much of this is the result of retitling child prostitution as child sex trafficking (now with or without the crossing state lines)? What is behind this number?

” As of January 2015, the CyberTipline has received more than 3.3 million reports of suspected child sexual exploitation since it was launched in 1998. As of January 2015, NCMEC’s Child Victim Identification Program has reviewed and analyzed more than 132 million child pornography images since it was created in 2002.”
That is tragic, horrible, and deserving of resources. But is does taking our children’s freedom do any good?

” 1 in 6 endangered runaways reported to the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children in 2014 were likely sex trafficking victims.
68 percent of these likely sex trafficking victims were in the care of social services or foster care when they ran.”

Society has long known that runaways were at high risk of falling into a life of crime, including prostitution. It’s not like they can get a legit job, and most of them have limited skills. This fact is tragic, but how do you help a child who is running from help? What is it about runaways from social services that makes the child more likely to end up victims? And how does keeping a child away from walking alone to and from the park prevent them from running away? Or if they run away from winding up used by criminals?

” One in 25 children ages 10 to 17 received an online sexual solicitation where the solicitor tried to make offline contact.”
Look closely at the stats related to this…http://soldnomore.org/internet-safety/
They add that “Four percent of all youth Internet users received aggressive sexual solicitations, which threatened to spill over into “real life”. These solicitors asked to meet the youth in person, called them on the telephone or sent offline mail, money or gifts.” and “80% of online offenders against youth were eventually explicit with youth about their intentions, and only 5% concealed the fact that they were adults from their victims.”
So I ask: Does keeping our children from going to the park and making friends make the creep who promises them freedom from their parents in exchange for sex, more or less appealing? They aren’t being attacked through the WiFi. If they haven’t given out personal info, all it is, is an offer. Who is more likely to take that offer? I’ll tell my kid not to give out personal info on line. But I’m not going to let her life be dominated by the fear of someone making an online pass at her.

” Four percent of cell phone owning teens ages 12 to 17 say they have sent sexually suggestive nude/semi-nude messages to others via text message.”
For all the hullabaloo I would have thought it was more. I would have expected more just from teens telling their boyfriend/girlfriend they were home alone. Of course I will warn my daughter you can’t take those photos back. But with numbers that low. I’m guessing the message has made it through to most teens. …. And the relationship of this to sending a kid to the park is what again?

” 15 percent of cell phone owning teens ages 12 to 17 say they have received sexually suggestive nude/semi-nude images of someone they know via text.”
And a girl in my band class stripped between the buses in the middle of the parking lot. Exposing about 80 people to her semi nude body. Also there was that streaker at the football game when I was a kid. Heck in pre-school there was a boy who liked pulling down his pants at the top of the play structure. And there was the 17 year old boy in college who got naked and rolled on the grass in front of one of the girl’s dorms. Some people are exhibitionist. Is it any surprise they act like exhibitionists online? I’m generally, and justly, considered a prude. But get a grip. The only difference is the electronic record, and the fact that we are locking up kids as child pornographers for sending nude pics of themselves, or worse for receiving one. And for what, something almost all of us experienced in the physical world without any harm? This just calls into question the FBI and their collection and analysis of 132 million child pornography images. As I recall there was a teen boy who was nearly forcibly injected because the police wanted to photograph his erection to prove the image he sent was of his own body, so they could send him to jail for it. When they flip out over this stuff, and become the molesters, I really question what portion of those 132 million images and 3.3 million calls were any of their business to begin with. In fact, I take back what I said earlier about worthy of funding. If sexting teens is what they are in a froth about, and spending our tax dollars analyzing, they are frankly over funded. Those resources were for exploited children, not to harass dumb teen exhibitionists.

@Havva, and how many of those “youths” being propositioned online were 16 and 17 and in adult places? I remember, when I got AOL in the mid-1990s and was 17, I was propositioned all the time. I have no doubt that the vast majority of those propositioning me were not predators. I put them on ignore. Problem solved.

We will never be able to protect teens from themselves. If a teen decides to go to a place online where adults go to engage in sexual chat and arrange sexual meetings, they are very likely going to get propositioned. Just like, if a teen decides to go into a club notorious for hook-ups, they will likely get propositioned. The question is how often children and teens are being approached in places intended for young people rather than adults, and how often they are being coerced, manipulated, or pressured into sexual situations or conversations they did not intentionally seek out.

When I was 16, I went out and bought a bag of weed from a classmate’s twenty-something cousin. That’s very different than a twenty-something hanging out at the local middle school or high school offering weed to kids who are innocently passing by. It’s been shown, IIRC, that most teens who are “exploited” online not only intended to engage in virtual sexual behaviors in adult internet spaces but also engaged in such behaviors with numerous adults. We need to be better at distinguishing between predatory behavior (seeking out minors to exploit) and stupid behavior (not saying no when approached by a teen who is him- or herself seeking out sex/drugs/alcohol, etc.).

@Anne: So this halfway house…it’s got staff and that, right? Staff who like, the rest of us, have been bathed in the fear-obsessed culture. Do you really think the staff aren’t going to watch the erm…. ‘residents’ like a hawk? Especially those 2/60.