Government will take your kids if you do not helicopter them (1 Viewer)

[Mr. Cross]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/maryland-couple-want-free-range-kids-but-not-all-do/2015/01/14/d406c0be-9c0f-11e4-bcfb-059ec7a93ddc_story.html

It was a one-mile walk home from a Silver Spring park on Georgia Avenue on a Saturday
afternoon. But what the parents saw as a moment of independence for their 10-year-old son and
6-year-old daughter, they say authorities viewed much differently.Danielle and Alexander Meitiv say they are being investigated for neglect for the Dec. 20 trek —
in a case they say reflects a clash of ideas about how safe the world is and whether parents are
free to make their own choices about raising their children.

“We wouldn’t have let them do it if we didn’t think they were ready for it,” Danielle said.

She said her son and daughter have previously paired up for walks around the block, to a nearby
7-Eleven and to a library about three-quarters of a mile away. “They have proven they are
responsible,” she said. “They’ve developed these skills.”

The Meitivs say they believe in “free-range” parenting, a movement that has been a counterpoint
to the hyper-vigilance of “helicopter” parenting, with the idea that children learn self-reliance by
being allowed to progressively test limits, make choices and venture out in the world.

“The world is actually even safer than when I was a child, and I just want to give them the same
freedom and independence that I had — basically an old-fashioned childhood,” she said. “I think
it’s absolutely critical for their development — to learn responsibility, to experience the world, to
gain confidence and competency.”

On Dec. 20, Alexander agreed to let the children, Rafi and Dvora, walk from Woodside Park to
their home, a mile south, in an area the family says the children know well.
The children made it about halfway.

Police picked up the children near the Discovery building, the family said, after someone
reported seeing them.

Police on Wednesday did not immediately have information on the case. But a spokeswoman
said that when concerns are reported, “we have a responsibility as part of our duty to check on
people’s welfare.”

The Meitivs say their son told police that he and his sister were not doing anything illegal and
are allowed to walk. Usually, their mother said, the children carry a laminated card with parent
contact information that says: “I am not lost. I am a free-range kid.” The kids didn’t have the
card that day.

Danielle said she and her husband give parenting a lot of thought.

“Parenthood is an exercise in risk management,” she said. “Every day, we decide: Are we going
to let our kids play football? Are we going to let them do a sleepover? Are we going to let them
climb a tree? We’re not saying parents should abandon all caution. We’re saying parents should
pay attention to risks that are dangerous and likely to happen.”

She added: “Abductions are extremely rare. Car accidents are not. The number one cause of
death for children of their age is a car accident.”

Danielle is a climate-science consultant, and Alexander is a physicist at the National Institutes of
Health.

Alexander said he had a tense time with police on Dec. 20 when officers returned his children,
asked for his identification and told him about the dangers of the world.

The more lasting issue has been with Montgomery County Child Protective Services, he said,
which showed up a couple of hours after the police left.

Mary Anderson, a spokeswoman for CPS, said she could not comment on cases but that neglect
investigations typically focus on questions of whether there has been a failure to provide proper
care and supervision.

In such investigations, she said, CPS may look for guidance to a state law about leaving children
unattended, which says children younger than 8 must be left with a reliable person who is at
least 13 years old. The law covers dwellings, enclosures and vehicles.

The Meitivs say that on Dec. 20, a CPS worker required Alexander to sign a safety plan pledging
he would not leave his children unsupervised until the following Monday, when CPS would
follow up. At first he refused, saying he needed to talk to a lawyer, his wife said, but changed his
mind when he was told his children would be removed if he did not comply.

Following the holidays, the family said, CPS called again, saying the agency needed to inquire
further and visit the family’s home. Danielle said she resisted.

“It seemed such a huge violation of privacy to examine my house because my kids were walking
home,” she said.

This week, a CPS social worker showed up at her door, she said. She did not let him in. She said
she was stunned to later learn from the principal that her children were interviewed at school.
The family has a meeting set for next week at CPS offices in Rockville.

“I think what CPS considered neglect, we felt was an essential part of growing up and maturing,”
Alexander said. “We feel we’re being bullied into a point of view about child-rearing that we
strongly disagree with.”

You liberal drive by media types sure love government control and creating panic do not you?

 

[Fennis]

My wife doesnt think helicoptering is as funny as I do

 

[Koya]

If you are stupid enough to let a govt legally kill its citizens, want the govt to decide what is morally right and which religion to support and/or think the govt decide who is "too dangerous" for our constitutional legal protections (ie ok to torture, ok to have detainees ala Guantanamo) then seriously shut your hypocritical mouth.

Now, if you really don't want GOVERNMENT control then you should be concerned not only about the local overreach discribed in the (Honda?) article, and you best be against all the above considering that's federal control.

 

[Koya]

My wife doesnt think helicoptering is as funny as I do

What about a good Donkey Punch or Shanghai Surprise?

 

[Drifter]

Pfft. When I was about 10, my friend's dad (an alchoholic) forgot to pick us up from Soccer one Saturday. 6 mile walk home through the steel mills and less than friendly environments of the wrong side of town...

 

[Mr. Cross]

If you are stupid enough to let a govt legally kill its citizens, want the govt to decide what is morally right and which religion to support and/or think the govt decide who is "too dangerous" for our constitutional legal protections (ie ok to torture, ok to have detainees ala Guantanamo) then seriously shut your hypocritical mouth.

Now, if you really don't want GOVERNMENT control then you should be concerned not only about the local overreach discribed in the (Honda?) article, and you best be against all the above considering that's federal control.

What are you talking about. I never said I was for those things.

 

[Koya]

If you are stupid enough to let a govt legally kill its citizens, want the govt to decide what is morally right and which religion to support and/or think the govt decide who is "too dangerous" for our constitutional legal protections (ie ok to torture, ok to have detainees ala Guantanamo) then seriously shut your hypocritical mouth.

Now, if you really don't want GOVERNMENT control then you should be concerned not only about the local overreach discribed in the (Honda?) article, and you best be against all the above considering that's federal control.

What are you talking about. I never said I was for those things.

Did I mention anything about you, particularly? That said, a whole bunch of folks would lampoon the incident in the article yet be completely ok with the other more broad and probably more dangerous forms of governmental overreach.

Just to be clear:

1. Are you for or against the death penalty?

2. For or against the right of equality for all to marry?

3. Against the current state whereby Judeo Christian theology is allowed and intermingled in govt affairs (the pledge with a mention of God, having a mono theistic reference on currency, etc)

4. Against govt sanctioned torture

5. Against the detention of individuals ala Guantanamo without due process?

 

[ClownCausedChaos2]

At what age did you begin allowing your wife to walk to the park by herself?

 

[3C's]

Damn, if I only knew that was all it would take. <_<

 

[TheAristocrat]

I was walking a mile to school alone against my parents wishes at the age because it was fun. Through the woods, across the neighborhood, and to the park with the lake? Or main road to main road? Either way ends in cross over the highway. Candy stop? 4 blocks to school.

Later on in life, I realized my parents made a few years worth of bus payments that were completely unnecessary.

 

[Beerguzzler]

So clearly this has been blown out of proportion. It was only worsened by the parents refusal to let CPS come into the house.

Cops ####ed up making this a case though. All they had to do was escort them home and see what's up. Non issue.

 

[GoFishTN]

If you are stupid enough to let a govt legally kill its citizens, want the govt to decide what is morally right and which religion to support and/or think the govt decide who is "too dangerous" for our constitutional legal protections (ie ok to torture, ok to have detainees ala Guantanamo) then seriously shut your hypocritical mouth.

Now, if you really don't want GOVERNMENT control then you should be concerned not only about the local overreach discribed in the (Honda?) article, and you best be against all the above considering that's federal control.

What are you talking about. I never said I was for those things.

Did I mention anything about you, particularly? That said, a whole bunch of folks would lampoon the incident in the article yet be completely ok with the other more broad and probably more dangerous forms of governmental overreach.

Just to be clear:

1. Are you for or against the death penalty?

2. For or against the right of equality for all to marry?

3. Against the current state whereby Judeo Christian theology is allowed and intermingled in govt affairs (the pledge with a mention of God, having a mono theistic reference on currency, etc)

4. Against govt sanctioned torture

5. Against the detention of individuals ala Guantanamo without due process?

Are you drunk already?

 

[Jack White]

So clearly this has been blown out of proportion. It was only worsened by the parents refusal to let CPS come into the house.

Cops ####ed up making this a case though. All they had to do was escort them home and see what's up. Non issue.

Why would any sane person allow CPS come into his house?

 

[renesauz]

If you are stupid enough to let a govt legally kill its citizens, want the govt to decide what is morally right and which religion to support and/or think the govt decide who is "too dangerous" for our constitutional legal protections (ie ok to torture, ok to have detainees ala Guantanamo) then seriously shut your hypocritical mouth.

Now, if you really don't want GOVERNMENT control then you should be concerned not only about the local overreach discribed in the (Honda?) article, and you best be against all the above considering that's federal control.

This argument is old and tired. The government doesn't kill it's citizens. Whether you agree with the death penalty or not is moot, because in the end there are a ton of rules regarding it with the key rule being a jury of one's peers finding one huilty of MURDER- the premature ending of another private citizen's life.

 

[renesauz]

OH....and this is a travesty. I ran all over the neighborhood unatended/gaurded at the age of 6 or 7.

 

[Jayrod]

If you are stupid enough to let a govt legally kill its citizens, want the govt to decide what is morally right and which religion to support and/or think the govt decide who is "too dangerous" for our constitutional legal protections (ie ok to torture, ok to have detainees ala Guantanamo) then seriously shut your hypocritical mouth.

Now, if you really don't want GOVERNMENT control then you should be concerned not only about the local overreach discribed in the (Honda?) article, and you best be against all the above considering that's federal control.

What are you talking about. I never said I was for those things.

Did I mention anything about you, particularly? That said, a whole bunch of folks would lampoon the incident in the article yet be completely ok with the other more broad and probably more dangerous forms of governmental overreach.

Just to be clear:

1. Are you for or against the death penalty?

2. For or against the right of equality for all to marry?

3. Against the current state whereby Judeo Christian theology is allowed and intermingled in govt affairs (the pledge with a mention of God, having a mono theistic reference on currency, etc)

4. Against govt sanctioned torture

5. Against the detention of individuals ala Guantanamo without due process?

 

[FUBAR]

If you are stupid enough to let a govt legally kill its citizens, want the govt to decide what is morally right and which religion to support and/or think the govt decide who is "too dangerous" for our constitutional legal protections (ie ok to torture, ok to have detainees ala Guantanamo) then seriously shut your hypocritical mouth.

Now, if you really don't want GOVERNMENT control then you should be concerned not only about the local overreach discribed in the (Honda?) article, and you best be against all the above considering that's federal control.

What are you talking about. I never said I was for those things.

Did I mention anything about you, particularly? That said, a whole bunch of folks would lampoon the incident in the article yet be completely ok with the other more broad and probably more dangerous forms of governmental overreach.

Just to be clear:

1. Are you for or against the death penalty?

2. For or against the right of equality for all to marry?

3. Against the current state whereby Judeo Christian theology is allowed and intermingled in govt affairs (the pledge with a mention of God, having a mono theistic reference on currency, etc)

4. Against govt sanctioned torture

5. Against the detention of individuals ala Guantanamo without due process?

You're on quite the fishing trip here.

I do want "government control" when it comes to the criminal justice system and war.

I do not want "government control" against reasonable parenting. There's a huge difference between neglect and what these parents did.

When it comes to individual rights which don't negatively affect other people, I'm almost always going to side with letting people make their own decisions.

 

[FUBAR]

OH....and this is a travesty. I ran all over the neighborhood unatended/gaurded at the age of 6 or 7.

We used to walk 3 blocks to school, from kindergarten on. Without parents.

Now, my 6 year old gets picked up every day, driven in a car pool instead of walking 3 blocks which would not cross any busy intersections. I don't like it but our local group of moms handles it so I haven't felt compelled to fight the system.

 

[Koya]

Very few straight answers and a lot of hypocrisy and avoiding/deflecting the issue, I see.

Only seems to help prove my point.

 

[FUBAR]

Very few straight answers and a lot of hypocrisy and avoiding/deflecting the issue, I see.

Only seems to help prove my point.

yes, you did a good job there.

 

[mr roboto]

Very few straight answers and a lot of hypocrisy and avoiding/deflecting the issue, I see.

Only seems to help prove my point.

Shut up. You aren't discussing the actual issue in the article. You went on some kind of 'GOP are hypocritz!!!!!!' rant. Weird.

 

[joffer]

My wife doesnt think helicoptering is as funny as I do

is that where you spin them around, faster and faster, and the eventually let go, propelling them on a ballistic path into some bushes?

 

[Mr. Pickles]

You liberal drive by media types sure love government control and creating panic do not you?

Easy, Rush.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

If this is the law

"which says children younger than 8 must be left with a reliable person who is at

least 13 years old. The law covers dwellings, enclosures and vehicles."

doesnt seem that walking outside even counts to me.

Cops and CPS over stepping their bounds here. a 6 and 10 year old should be allowed to play outside by themselves, I dont get it.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

At what age did you begin allowing your wife to walk to the park by herself?

lol

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Helicopter as a verb? Doesn't that mean something else?

 

[Mr. Cross]

The government is going to take these kids and nobody cares. This is why people become terrorists. I guess if they were black kids Obama would care.

 

[jonessed]

If you are stupid enough to let a govt legally kill its citizens, want the govt to decide what is morally right and which religion to support and/or think the govt decide who is "too dangerous" for our constitutional legal protections (ie ok to torture, ok to have detainees ala Guantanamo) then seriously shut your hypocritical mouth.

Now, if you really don't want GOVERNMENT control then you should be concerned not only about the local overreach discribed in the (Honda?) article, and you best be against all the above considering that's federal control.

What are you talking about. I never said I was for those things.

Did I mention anything about you, particularly? That said, a whole bunch of folks would lampoon the incident in the article yet be completely ok with the other more broad and probably more dangerous forms of governmental overreach.Just to be clear:

1. Are you for or against the death penalty?

2. For or against the right of equality for all to marry?

3. Against the current state whereby Judeo Christian theology is allowed and intermingled in govt affairs (the pledge with a mention of God, having a mono theistic reference on currency, etc)

4. Against govt sanctioned torture

5. Against the detention of individuals ala Guantanamo without due process?

Seriously .

The police messed this one up and then CPS went overboard. Having a department that takes away children compensated by the number of children they take away is a terrible idea. There needs to be a more rational oversight channel on these guys.

 

[cstu]

So clearly this has been blown out of proportion. It was only worsened by the parents refusal to let CPS come into the house.

Cops ####ed up making this a case though. All they had to do was escort them home and see what's up. Non issue.

Doesn't seem like they did:

10-year-old son and 6-year-old daughter

In such investigations, she said, CPS may look for guidance to a state law about leaving children

unattended, which says children younger than 8 must be left with a reliable person who is at

least 13 years old. The law covers dwellings, enclosures and vehicles.

 

[cstu]

If this is the law

"which says children younger than 8 must be left with a reliable person who is at

least 13 years old. The law covers dwellings, enclosures and vehicles."

doesnt seem that walking outside even counts to me.

Cops and CPS over stepping their bounds here. a 6 and 10 year old should be allowed to play outside by themselves, I dont get it.

The law makes no sense if it's ok to let a 6 and 10 yo go anywhere they want by themselves but aren't allowed to be at home alone.

 

[mr roboto]

I really didn't know there were specific laws with ages attached. Gonna look up my state laws.

 

[mr roboto]

Illinois DCFS PDF guide on leaving kids home alone...

http://www.state.il.us/dcfs/docs/prepar_Kids.pdf

Illinois law defines a neglected minor, in part, as any minor under the age of 14 years whose parent or other person responsible for

the minors welfare leaves the minor without supervision for an unreasonable period of time without regard for the mental or physical health, safety or welfare of that minor.

Juvenile Court Act, 705 ILCS 405/2-3(1)(d)

 

[Jayrod]

I can't find anything definitive in Missouri about child neglect. The statute includes children under 18 and is very vague. Lots of room for interpretation it seems.

 

[FUBAR]

Illinois DCFS PDF guide on leaving kids home alone...

http://www.state.il.us/dcfs/docs/prepar_Kids.pdf

Illinois law defines a neglected minor, in part, as any minor under the age of 14 years whose parent or other person responsible for

the minors welfare leaves the minor without supervision for an unreasonable period of time without regard for the mental or physical health, safety or welfare of that minor.

Juvenile Court Act, 705 ILCS 405/2-3(1)(d)

For north Carolina:

Fort Bragg is the only North Carolina community WRAL could find with detailed rules about when a child can be left home alone. Under the rules, children under 10 require direct supervision, 11-year-olds can have monitored supervision for up to two hours. At age 12, children can be home alone for up to three hours.

The policy, however, does not specify the penalty for violating the rules.

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

Very few straight answers and a lot of hypocrisy and avoiding/deflecting the issue, I see.

Only seems to help prove my point.

Shut up. You aren't discussing the actual issue in the article. You went on some kind of 'GOP are hypocritz!!!!!!' rant. Weird.

Koya has been off the reservation for a few years now. She went off on me about something awhile back that made me aware of the crazy.

 

[Guest]

"Free-range kid"

 

[Jayrod]

Very few straight answers and a lot of hypocrisy and avoiding/deflecting the issue, I see.

Only seems to help prove my point.

Shut up. You aren't discussing the actual issue in the article. You went on some kind of 'GOP are hypocritz!!!!!!' rant. Weird.

Koya has been off the reservation for a few years now. She went off on me about something awhile back that made me aware of the crazy.

Wait, Koya is a chick?

 

[FUBAR]

"Free-range kid"

Factory kids are stringy.

 

[msommer]

Illinois DCFS PDF guide on leaving kids home alone...

http://www.state.il.us/dcfs/docs/prepar_Kids.pdf

Illinois law defines a neglected minor, in part, as any minor under the age of 14 years whose parent or other person responsible for

the minors welfare leaves the minor without supervision for an unreasonable period of time without regard for the mental or physical health, safety or welfare of that minor.

Juvenile Court Act, 705 ILCS 405/2-3(1)(d)

For north Carolina:

Fort Bragg is the only North Carolina community WRAL could find with detailed rules about when a child can be left home alone. Under the rules, children under 10 require direct supervision, 11-year-olds can have monitored supervision for up to two hours. At age 12, children can be home alone for up to three hours.

The policy, however, does not specify the penalty for violating the rules.

Good thing I don't live in NC. Left my 12 year old alone 6 hours Saturday. I was doing boring stuff, she was quite happy on her own.

 

[matuski]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/maryland-couple-want-free-range-kids-but-not-all-do/2015/01/14/d406c0be-9c0f-11e4-bcfb-059ec7a93ddc_story.html

It was a one-mile walk home from a Silver Spring park on Georgia Avenue on a Saturdayafternoon. But what the parents saw as a moment of independence for their 10-year-old son and

6-year-old daughter, they say authorities viewed much differently.

Danielle and Alexander Meitiv say they are being investigated for neglect for the Dec. 20 trek —

in a case they say reflects a clash of ideas about how safe the world is and whether parents are

free to make their own choices about raising their children.

“We wouldn’t have let them do it if we didn’t think they were ready for it,” Danielle said.

She said her son and daughter have previously paired up for walks around the block, to a nearby

7-Eleven and to a library about three-quarters of a mile away. “They have proven they are

responsible,” she said. “They’ve developed these skills.”

The Meitivs say they believe in “free-range” parenting, a movement that has been a counterpoint

to the hyper-vigilance of “helicopter” parenting, with the idea that children learn self-reliance by

being allowed to progressively test limits, make choices and venture out in the world.

“The world is actually even safer than when I was a child, and I just want to give them the same

freedom and independence that I had — basically an old-fashioned childhood,” she said. “I think

it’s absolutely critical for their development — to learn responsibility, to experience the world, to

gain confidence and competency.”

On Dec. 20, Alexander agreed to let the children, Rafi and Dvora, walk from Woodside Park to

their home, a mile south, in an area the family says the children know well.

The children made it about halfway.

Police picked up the children near the Discovery building, the family said, after someone

reported seeing them.

Police on Wednesday did not immediately have information on the case. But a spokeswoman

said that when concerns are reported, “we have a responsibility as part of our duty to check on

people’s welfare.”

The Meitivs say their son told police that he and his sister were not doing anything illegal and

are allowed to walk. Usually, their mother said, the children carry a laminated card with parent

contact information that says: “I am not lost. I am a free-range kid.” The kids didn’t have the

card that day.

Danielle said she and her husband give parenting a lot of thought.

“Parenthood is an exercise in risk management,” she said. “Every day, we decide: Are we going

to let our kids play football? Are we going to let them do a sleepover? Are we going to let them

climb a tree? We’re not saying parents should abandon all caution. We’re saying parents should

pay attention to risks that are dangerous and likely to happen.”

She added: “Abductions are extremely rare. Car accidents are not. The number one cause of

death for children of their age is a car accident.”

Danielle is a climate-science consultant, and Alexander is a physicist at the National Institutes of

Health.

Alexander said he had a tense time with police on Dec. 20 when officers returned his children,

asked for his identification and told him about the dangers of the world.

The more lasting issue has been with Montgomery County Child Protective Services, he said,

which showed up a couple of hours after the police left.

Mary Anderson, a spokeswoman for CPS, said she could not comment on cases but that neglect

investigations typically focus on questions of whether there has been a failure to provide proper

care and supervision.

In such investigations, she said, CPS may look for guidance to a state law about leaving children

unattended, which says children younger than 8 must be left with a reliable person who is at

least 13 years old. The law covers dwellings, enclosures and vehicles.

The Meitivs say that on Dec. 20, a CPS worker required Alexander to sign a safety plan pledging

he would not leave his children unsupervised until the following Monday, when CPS would

follow up. At first he refused, saying he needed to talk to a lawyer, his wife said, but changed his

mind when he was told his children would be removed if he did not comply.

Following the holidays, the family said, CPS called again, saying the agency needed to inquire

further and visit the family’s home. Danielle said she resisted.

“It seemed such a huge violation of privacy to examine my house because my kids were walking

home,” she said.

This week, a CPS social worker showed up at her door, she said. She did not let him in. She said

she was stunned to later learn from the principal that her children were interviewed at school.

The family has a meeting set for next week at CPS offices in Rockville.

“I think what CPS considered neglect, we felt was an essential part of growing up and maturing,”

Alexander said. “We feel we’re being bullied into a point of view about child-rearing that we

strongly disagree with.”

You liberal drive by media types sure love government control and creating panic do not you?

CPS has God on its side.

 

[cstu]

Laws by state.

Lynn Yaney, spokeswoman for the agency that handles child welfare in Contra Costa County, California, states:

"A general rule of thumb is that kids under age seven aren't capable of thinking logically and putting cause and effect together," Tanner said. "They are reliant on caregivers to structure their day."

Children between ages 7 and 10 years aren't generally ready to self-supervise for an extended period, but in a routine and predictable environment, such as just after school, they can manage, Tanner said.

Children 12 and 13 years old should be judged on a case- by-case basis but should not be left alone overnight.

 

[joffer]

Laws by state.

Lynn Yaney, spokeswoman for the agency that handles child welfare in Contra Costa County, California, states:

"A general rule of thumb is that kids under age seven aren't capable of thinking logically and putting cause and effect together," Tanner said. "They are reliant on caregivers to structure their day."

Children between ages 7 and 10 years aren't generally ready to self-supervise for an extended period, but in a routine and predictable environment, such as just after school, they can manage, Tanner said.

Children 12 and 13 years old should be judged on a case- by-case basis but should not be left alone overnight.

Doesn't sound like Tanner

 

[FUBAR]

Illinois DCFS PDF guide on leaving kids home alone...

http://www.state.il.us/dcfs/docs/prepar_Kids.pdf

Illinois law defines a neglected minor, in part, as any minor under the age of 14 years whose parent or other person responsible for

the minors welfare leaves the minor without supervision for an unreasonable period of time without regard for the mental or physical health, safety or welfare of that minor.

Juvenile Court Act, 705 ILCS 405/2-3(1)(d)

For north Carolina:Fort Bragg is the only North Carolina community WRAL could find with detailed rules about when a child can be left home alone. Under the rules, children under 10 require direct supervision, 11-year-olds can have monitored supervision for up to two hours. At age 12, children can be home alone for up to three hours.

The policy, however, does not specify the penalty for violating the rules.

Good thing I don't live in NC. Left my 12 year old alone 6 hours Saturday. I was doing boring stuff, she was quite happy on her own.

That's only Fort Bragg, federal jurisdiction, believe it may be local policy.https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&ei=LaS9VNHRKcS7ggS6_4GgDg&url=http://www.fortbraggmwr.com/CYS/homealone.pdf&ved=0CBwQFjAA&usg=AFQjCNFIjRxTGBa9-wnM7G4MRq3vMcsJpQ&sig2=7_edOAviSookEXBCPXy-tg

 

[Ilov80s]

We have federal laws outlining the ages and time periods a kid can be home alone? In this day and age where crime is down and there are so many more means of communication, it's absurd.

 

[FUBAR]

We have federal laws outlining the ages and time periods a kid can be home alone? In this day and age where crime is down and there are so many more means of communication, it's absurd.

Fixed my post. Pretty sure it's just local policy on a federal enclave.

 

[njherdfan]

Just curious, but what should have done differently? If there's one agency that should be really diligent and not necessarily just accept what adults have to say, shouldn't it be CPS? From what I gathered in the article, CPS kept on showing up because the parents essentially kept stonewalling them. They have a meeting scheduled next week where all of this will get cleared up, I assume.

 

[Riversco]

If you don't like it, you are free to move out into the country and let your kids free range all they want.

 

[GoFishTN]

Very few straight answers and a lot of hypocrisy and avoiding/deflecting the issue, I see.

Only seems to help prove my point.

Shut up. You aren't discussing the actual issue in the article. You went on some kind of 'GOP are hypocritz!!!!!!' rant. Weird.

Koya has been off the reservation for a few years now. She went off on me about something awhile back that made me aware of the crazy.

Wait, Koya is a chick?

Now it all makes sense.

 

[renesauz]

If you don't like it, you are free to move out into the country and let your kids free range all they want.

 

[FUBAR]

If you don't like it, you are free to move out into the country and let your kids free range all they want.

that's the spirit that made this country great!