Cutting the Cord

[scotplaya]

My mom used to let me walk to elementary school but my family deemed her a bad mother so I had to drive a block with my mom to school.

[jonthom11702]

I live in NY, and I have to admit I might have ridden with the child on that first subway ride, but still let him find his way home. Then again I didn't grow up in NYC. Kids who grow up in the city aren't usually fazed by mass transit. I was however allowed to ride my bike fairly long distances on major roads without incident. Contrary to what folks think, there were no maniacal pedophiles hiding in corners waiting to pounce on me.

[LRS84]

omfg, this kid is nine he's old enough to go on the subway. Parents ARE too protective. kids are always going to be kids, and let them be

[BBGenelie]

i was on a short leash... then i retaliated much to my parents delight... im a good girl now. i just wanted to see what it was like to run around free.

[QueenValentinalina]

i agree with that lady

[slygirls09]

whoa what the hell? that's ain't right. you can't leave your kids until they are able to drive, heeeeeeeeeeeeelo!

[JohnHardyTV]

Nope Wrong

My Dad would leave me alone at home when I was 5

I was able to walk the streets on my own when I was 8

Its the matter of educating your children to make good judgements about their actions

Let them know the Good Neighborhoods and Bad Neighborhoods

[BinkieMcFartnuggets]

You've got to cut the cord with kids eventually, but preferably right after they exit the vagina, otherwise you risk infection.

[BBGenelie]

hahahahahaha

good one.. good one!

[PicklesRTasty]

My parents allowed me to do what ever I wanted at the age of 12 and on. They were always very under-protective, and I think I have benefited from it. I am vastly more mature than most people my age, and learned responsibility at a young age, when mistakes are not detrimental.

Many children who are on leashes have them suddenly released, and the children react by drinking, doing drugs and messing their life up. Being overprotective, ironically, harms your child, not protects it.

[999Atwood]

I agree with some of her ideas but a 9 year old alone on the mean streets of New York is just asking for a sexually assulted or murdered kid.

[JohnHardyTV]

Have you ever BEEN to the City?

[999Atwood]

@JohnHardyTV

I don't need to go to the city to read the crime stats. I live near Kansas City & would never let a 9 year old run around Kansas City by themselves. It's dumb & asking for a dead or missing kid.

[AndrewDeLong]

@999Atwood

You do realize more abductions, molestations, rapes, and murders of kids 14 or under has happened to them in or near the home, and almost always by someone they know personally.

To me, it feels safer letting the kid walk the streets alone.

[999Atwood]

@AndrewDeLong Yes, usually they are assulted by their moms NEW boyfriend....the one she drug into the house off the street or from the bar.

[AndrewDeLong]

@999Atwood

Worse than that. Hell, I live near V.T where a young girl was molested then murdered by her uncle. Like I said, it happens more with family and friends than it does with strangers.

[999Atwood]

@AndrewDeLong Well that uncle you speak of probably also cruises the streets looking for kids alone in his spare time......especially the uncles with only one niece or nephew. How about the case just this week in Missouri where the girl was taken right off the street in neat St. Louis? Thinks she was big enough to go it alone?

[AndrewDeLong]

@999Atwood

Well I'm not saying people aren't attacked anonymously, I'm just stating simple facts. More attacks happen within the home, than outside the home. It should also be noted that we have the same crime levels now, as we did in 1970, which was the era of kids going it alone.

Seriously, kids walking the streets in broad daylight, with literally hundreds of people are safer due to more potential "good Samaritans" than people who are willing to risk being caught in public.

[AndrewDeLong]

Oh, and that Uncle I speak of has no priors and is even facing the (potential) death penalty as we speak.

[999Atwood]

@AndrewDeLong Well you can swim in shark infested waters many times before the day you finally get attacked, but on the day you get attacked it is not worth it. You can ride a motorcycle for years without a helmet but the day you wreck it is not worth it. You can send your kids out on city streets alone at 8 and get by with it maybe but on the day they get taken, you'll look like an ass. That is about the size of it.

[maniacalmike]

@999Atwood The probability of stranger abduction, etc. is vanishingly small, which is why the few cases are national news. You sound paranoid. There are much more serious risks to worry about, like the well-meaning but misguided parents who don't allow their children to be immunized, thus risking the return of childhood diseases that used to kill thousands of children each year.

[AndrewDeLong]

@999Atwood

Well, I personally prefer not to live an "if this happens" based life. A kid stands less of a chance getting attacked outside the home than inside the home. Misinformation and the "soccer moms of America" have led people to believe otherwise.

And would a parent not look equally like an ass if the child got attacked by a known assailant inside the home? In THAT case, the parent truly failed to right a serious wrong. Just trying to keep things fair.

[999Atwood]

@AndrewDeLong I'm not going to gamble a young kids life on some dumb theory that this will make them more sucessful & independent. How does this lady explain the millions of successful, independent adults who grew up in homes that never allowed this? (And most don't) You are right that a parent who does protect their kids from attacks inside the home are equally asses.

[AndrewDeLong]

@999Atwood

She can explain it the same way as for those kids who grew up in free range homes. They had to grow up and become independent. There is no added risk in allowing to do what she did for her kid.

[999Atwood]

@AndrewDeLong I think you mean there is no benefit to what she did, with one hell of a lot of extra risk, especially if the kid had been a girl.

[AndrewDeLong]

@999Atwood

Oh, there is plenty of benefit in teaching the kid self reliance. Matter of fact, protected kids are better targets once they're finally let out into the world due to their sheer naivete.

As for the kid being a girl, again a moot point. Most attackers, be they known or not to the victim, don't really care about the sex of the child, just that the child cannot actually fight back.

[MadManM00n]

betsall -- bad influences, bullying, violence--are part of life. The rest, statistics show, are not nearly as prevalent as tv would have you believe.

Give your kid independence at a young age and they will be able to handle challenges when they arrive. By hovering to "protect" your child from every possible risk, you're failing to give them the skills to do the same on their own.

As it says in this weeks Time magazine article, "It's self-confidence, not parent assisted confidence."

[betsall]

pedofhiles...addictions...bad influnces...teen pregency.....violence.....bull­ying.................yeah parents arent needed much

[TheWilliamcale]

when i was 17 i was so sick of my overprotective parents i said

"fuck you i'm going someplace you cant

smother me"

i left the country i left the country 1976

i spent 3 months on the streets of toronto and montreal, the drinking age was 18

and when i ran out of money i came home

with one hell of a hagover and a bad case of Gonorrhea , ah Montreal

ah french girls

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah the 70s

[Turkeyhead365]

lol

[GermanTechTutorials]

0:29 German :D:D

[Harley04]

Australian at 0:34 :D :D

[yakyakyak69]

Regressives are afraid of their own shadows.