Opinions on letting a child go out of the house

[Simcity11100 771]

I just want to hear your opinion on Letting a child out of the house without super vision. I think that kids should be allowed to leave the house without super vision, I even remember when a kid went on a subway by him self and didn't get kidnapped or anything and he was perfectly fine and he enjoyed it much more then going on the subway with his mom.

 

I even left my parent's house by myself when I was 7 and I didn't get kidnapped or what ever by someone, I even talked to a stranger and didn't get kidnapped or what ever.

Edited April 15, 2012 by Simcity11100

[Neikos 968]

Where is the "It's not safe but necessary" option? Because that is what I would vote. Being outside helps you, and not just by keeping yourself healthy in the short run. It allows your body to prepare it's defenses, as well as harden you psychologically against a number of things. ( Like if you fall from a large height and break your ankle, it hurts, but you didn't die. Later on, chances are that you won't have a phobia of heights. And so on. )

[Celestial Sloth 369]

I'd say it depends on how far they're going and how long they'll be.

Then again, I have no experience whatsoever on the subject.

[Zoop 8,384]

I would say that it depends partially on where the child is. If they live in a particularly rough area, it might be best to try and keep them a little closer than if they lived in a relatively easy going area. For the most part I'd say that sheltering the heck out of a kid doesn't really do them a lick of good in the long run, though.

[Doctor Whooves™ 332]

My opinion is partly safe, simply because you can't protect a child from everything out there, and even if you could, stalking your kid is just weird, no matter what the intentions.

[Fox 5,330]

I agree with Neikos, but sometimes depends on where you live. Anything really can happen, you can even be kidnapped at the age of 20 or get jumped. But I still agree that if your younger and get proper guidance you'll know how to avoid those things.

[Simcity11100 771]

Where is the "It's not safe but necessary" option? Because that is what I would vote. Being outside helps you, and not just by keeping yourself healthy in the short run. It allows your body to prepare it's defenses, as well as harden you psychologically against a number of things. ( Like if you fall from a large height and break your ankle, it hurts, but you didn't die. Later on, chances are that you won't have a phobia of heights. And so on. )

 

I added the choice.

[Neikos 968]

Obviously, I can't speak for this living in 'dangerous' zones. As where I have lived, ( France and Europe ) most of the problems arise in the less rich areas of big cities. ( Haven't lived in any. )

[RippedOffMattress 314]

Like Zoop said, it depends on what kind of neighborhood you live in. It'd be partially, but mostly safe where I live.

[Anachronous 682]

I believe in keeping kids on a leash of sorts, letting circumstance determine the length of said leash. Sheltering children does no one any favors but - alas! - allowing a child carte blanche outdoors can set them up for some nasty situations.

 

It's circumstantial really. Not safe but necessary.

Edited April 15, 2012 by Veecèiri

[HanPolo 150]

*parent mode activated*

 

It depends how old they are really. 4 years old? That aint happening. But any kid of a subitable age (over 8 maybe?) should be allowed out no problem, given that they dont go too far and that they keep there phone on them or something.

[Fox 5,330]

I believe in keeping kids on a leash of sorts, letting circumstance determine the length of said leash. Sheltering children does no one any favors but - alas! - allow a child carte blanche outdoors can set them up for some nasty situations.

 

It's circumstantial really. Not safe but necessary.

 

I'm glad you brought that up.

When I first saw these things I laughed so hard It's good for keeping your children from becoming to adventrous.

Obviously, I can't speak for this living in 'dangerous' zones. As where I have lived, ( France and Europe ) most of the problems arise in the less rich areas of big cities. ( Haven't lived in any. )

 

I live in Canada... probaly the most safiest country in the world.

[Simcity11100 771]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vx6nGxw_hnM

I think people should watch this.
Besides, I went alone on the streets when I was 7 and I was perfectly fine. Edited April 15, 2012 by Simcity11100

[NewCalamity 3,454]

It depends entirely on your environment. If you live in a city, it is not advisable to let your children out on a free-for-all. For those who live in suburbia, it is a place designed for families and does it's best to safeguard them.

 

Letting your kids go on their own gives them the confidence, strength and know-how to make due, but also has its drawbacks. Then again, sheltering your children too much can render them incompetent for far too long in the real world.

[Lady Rarity Pony 4,892]

Depends on what age we're talking about.

 

Young kids should not be let out of the house on their own, even in "safe" areas. They are kids, they don't know what they're doing and can't properly determine when trouble is arising.

What is considered "safe" to an adult is much different that what a kid sees as safe.

Kids see everything as safe.

Anything can be dangerous, letting a kid go out with no guidance and with little clue as to what is going on around them makes it very likely for something negative to result.

 

That doesn't mean lock them up in the house, but don't let them run free until they have a good sense of what is and isn't safe. Until then you can easily let them out under guidance.

[Anachronous 682]

-snip-

 

I wasn't being literal but, my word, that's hilarious.

[Jimmy Bronymian 140]

If you have the time, I would just go outside with the child. If not I would let the kid go outside, but try to keep an eye on them. That seems like the safest thing to do.

[Cadence Sparkle 101]

I just want to hear your opinion on Letting a child out of the house without super vision. I think that kids should be allowed to leave the house without super vision, I even remember when a kid went on a subway by him self and didn't get kidnapped or anything and he was perfectly fine and he enjoyed it much more then going on the subway with his mom.

 

I even left my parent's house by myself when I was 7 and I didn't get kidnapped or what ever by someone, I even talked to a stranger and didn't get kidnapped or what ever.

 

depends where ya live. It's more dangerous in a city than a small town etc.

[Simcity11100 771]

depends where ya live. It's more dangerous in a city than a small town etc.

 

I wouldn't say it's a small town because we live next to a busy highway and a semi major road and having a population above 50,000 isn't small, I would say more along the lines of a small city. The kid that took the subway lived in the Big Apple, I don't think that's a small town either Edited April 15, 2012 by Simcity11100

[LowfatEnvelope 335]

Like most seem to be saying, i think it depends. If where you lived was a dangerous environment (not nessicarily just from the people living there, but also what type of stuff is laying around on the ground or what type of animals happen to live there) i think i would have to go with keep them supervised if you let them venture forth. If it was an environment where there was hardly any danger from people and what-not, then i would probably say letting them go out is fine without being supervised as long as you have set down rules and guidelines.

[Aureity 3,055]

It depends on the community you live in, as well as the time of the day.

Is it safe to let the kids out of the house in a normal neighborhood at a normal time? Yes.

It it safe to let the kids out in Uganda at midnight? Nope, especially not with Kony around.

[DrOphthalmos 497]

Here's what I would tell my child:

 

 

Definitely dangerous but necessary... that's why I plan to train all of my kids to be ninjas.

[TomokoKuroki 1,707]

It depends on how old the child is too. If it is a 4 year old, you shouldn't be parents letting the child out on his own without supervision of some sort. If it's closer to 6-8, then I would say depending on how much the child knows about how dangerous strangers can be will determine if I let that child out without supervision.

 

But even then, I would set a boarder of where the child is allowed to go, and where not to go.

 

And of course if I lived in a small town, this would not be much of an issue. If it was an urban area, I would think completely otherwise about the child being alone. He or she could only go out without supervision if they are accompanied by friends.

[cuteycindyhoney 13,283]

There are too many variables for just a simple five choice poll. When I was about ten, I walked to the 7-11 with friends so we could all get a Slurpee. A guy there started asking us if we wanted to go with him to his house to do yard work to make some money. We stayed inside the 7-11 and the guy behind the counter called the police when we told him what had happened. The guy took off, and my mom came and picked us up.

 

You can't tell what could happen where.

[DrOphthalmos 497]

Oh, and naturally my feelings would vary on the neighborhood and time of day. It makes sense to adapt to the situation at hand.