9 year old rides subway AND bus alone

[TXChris]

That's the part that got me too Jaded. The fact that she was willing to risk her sons safety. Sure go ahead tell a stranger that you are lost at the age of 9 and maybe mention your mom didn't give you a cell phone because apparently you are not old enough or responsible enough to have a cell phone! Yessss what a great idea trust a city full of strangers with your 9 year old son but give him a quarter to call home if something bad happens. NICE

I'm not sure how to take the comment about the cell phone now. I'm torn. lol When I read it, and when I heard her talk on the news, I took it to mean that she didn't want to lose "it." You know, that she would've been calling him and checking up on him because she is his mother. After all, she did mention that she was worried at the beginning of the article. That was the context she seemed to put it in. I never even considered the fact that she was possibly talking about him losing the cell phone.

Also, somewhere else in the thread someone had mentioned that they felt she was doing it for T.V. time. I have to admit, hearing her on the news it seemed more like she wrote the article because she had been accosted so harshly by a few others and, at that point, felt the need to speak out. The news, I'm sure, just picked up on the article and had her on because what she did is so controversial.

[Athena]

Ahhh...Polarization, how I love thee. Still, what's good for the front page is not necessarily good for those of us who socialize daily. There are a few rather extreme positions that have been taken, here, and in the interest of world peace, I'd like to address them.

1.) TXChris: When parents refuse to allow their kids the opportunity to learn independence and self-reliance they are in-fact making sure their kids are unable to function properly when they get out on their own.

I'm glad you addressed your tendency toward sweeping generalization. The truth is, an unqualified, blanket generalization is no better than a false statement. The above is stated as an absolute, when it isn't. Just like some kids who are allowed to roam free never have anything bad happen to them, some kids who are smothered are not adversely affected by it. You are not necessarily damaging your kid by keeping them on a short leash, but you are risking it.

As has been mentioned, kids develop at different rates. There is no standard. "The Age of Reason" is a myth, in this context. I truely believe that the best course of action for rearing a child is to give them as much freedom as you think they can handle and pull back in the event that they can't. But, ultimately, your immediate family knows best when is appropriate to let out some rope.

What's important, however, is that you base these decisions on your child's ability and maturity level, not some arbitrary and unrealistic fear. "Stranger danger", while real, pales in comparison to other threats you may be ignoring. You can easily avoid stranger danger by taking some very simple steps, namely, educating your child. More kids effectively escape and report stranger danger than get abducted. Meanwhile, strap a fucking helmet on them when they ride their bike, emphasize the absolute NECESSITY of crossing only at crosswalks, and search their room on occasion. Kids don't deserve privacy. Columbine could have been prevented had the parents just been a little nosey, for christ's sake. /mini-rant

2.) Morbid: But thanks for telling us parents why we do what we do with our kids. I'll be sure to do the same when you are raising any.

I'm going to address this because it seems to be a popular opinion among the parent crowd. The message of this statement is, essentially, "Non-parents don't know and, therefore, have an invalid opinion." This is a common argument, used in any number of scenarios. A lack of personal experience does not necessarily invalidate an opinion. If this were the case, you wouldn't be able to give your friends relationship advice unless you've actually dated that man or woman, for example. No one would ever be taken seriously when commenting on something they haven't personally done before. Silly, right? :)

Truthfully, not having personal experience can sometimes give someone an edge. It's a tactic commonly used in companies. I'm sure you've all heard it at some point - "Lets bring in a fresh pair of eyes." Yep, believe it or not, sometimes, a lack of personal experience is actually preferred. Those of us not raising any children are not bound by emotion or hampered by routine. A parent might say, "You just can't understand why we do what we do," and they're right, generally. But did it ever occur to that parent that I might not understand...Because maybe it doesn't make sense from an unemotional (as opposed to "unexperienced") perspective? Realistically, emotion or personal involvement can cause smart people to do stupid things, or not see their situation clearly. There can be a benefit to getting an unbiased, unexperienced opinion.

3.) Lizard: ...but what are the primary issues when it comes to TXChris?

Heh. I'm going to take a shot at answering this objectively because, although Chris kindly explained his side, it's not an accurate representation of the whole situation.

TXChris came here, by my specific invitation, to discuss politics (reads: not necessarily to make friends). As you've noticed, I hang out in Three Things a lot, and I thought it could benefit from a thicker variety of political perspectives. That being said, as I'm sure you've also noticed, D'D is a fairly tightly-knit community. Lots of regulars know each other in real life or from other message boards. This results in a clique-ish element. Now, I know "clique" has a negative connotation, but it's just what happens when people become familiar with each other. It's totally natural.

The backlash that TXChris sometimes experiences is, in my opinion, the unfortunate result of two things: He tends to state an unpopular perspective in a manner that strikes people as arrogant from time to time, and he doesn't have offline friendships with many of the regulars. Now, neither thing in and of itself would result in the contention you've witnessed. I, admittedly, espouse some wickedly self-righteous and sharply-worded opinions on occasion. But these fine folks you see here tend to cut me some slack, because I'm friends with some of them and generally courteous to the rest. On the flip side, newbies will post opinions and not get slammed simply because they don't know anyone. But, if you combine the two, it'll create some friction.

Hope that helps.

4.) Mom: Yessss what a great idea trust a city full of strangers with your 9 year old son but give him a quarter to call home if something bad happens. NICE

I'm not addressing this in the interest of world peace. The cell phone phenomenon makes me smile. :p

I'd like to preface the following with this: I'm 25. "Things were different when we were kids" does not apply to me. I was a kid, like, 10 years ago. My sister was a kid even more recently. The world now is, for all intents and purposes, the same world it was then. We lived in the suburbs of a major city, enjoyed a great deal of freedom and...*Dun dun dun*...didn't have cell phones. Hell, I wasn't even rockin' a pager until I was 15 or so, and that was just so my parents could get ahold of me. The thing was worthless in the event I had to get hold of them.

There are payphones everywhere. A quarter is a relative luxury for some kids! It's all about the collect calls. :p Seriously, though...In the event that something bad is going down with your kid, you've got to have a better game plan than, "Give me a ring and sit tight, honey." Speaking from personal experience, when a bad guy is after you, you don't call home and stay where you are so your parent can find you. If you're smart and were instructed properly, you run, screaming "Help!" at the top of your lungs to the closest house or business and call home once you're safe.

Generally speaking, cell phones provide more false security than anything, given the frequency of bad reception areas or the possibility that the thing gets lost or broken. Not saying your kid shouldn't have one (I'd have loved one, personally), but it's a mistake to view them as some necessary tool for childhood adventure, and it could spell absolute disaster to build your safety plans around them.

Okay...I'm finally done.

[Rotten Apple]

Realistically, emotion or personal involvement can cause smart people to do stupid things, or not see their situation clearly. There can be a benefit to getting an unbiased, unexperienced opinion.

I think the issue most parents take is when non-parents provide unsolicited advice.

Also, how can you compare a business decision with raising children? Raising children is always emotional because children are living, breathing, beings with emotions of their own. Part of being a parent is providing for their emotional well-being.

I have no problem with unbiased advice, but unexperienced? Unless you are educated in the field of child psychology (and even then I would have trouble taking advice from someone with only "book knowledge,") you are not taking guesses on MY kid.

[TXChris]

I think the issue most parents take is when non-parents provide unsolicited advice.

Also, how can you compare a business decision with raising children? Raising children is always emotional because children are living, breathing, beings with emotions of their own. Part of being a parent is providing for their emotional well-being.

I have no problem with unbiased advice, but unexperienced? Unless you are educated in the field of child psychology (and even then I would have trouble taking advice from someone with only "book knowledge,") you are not taking guesses on MY kid.

And, when referring to myself, anyone who does not know me personally, or who only gets their information second-hand, is simply assuming certain things. This is not directed at you, Kathy. :) It's just a general statement. The truth is, for one to assume I have no experience in raising a child would be a grave mistake on that individual's part. Even certain people on this site who "claim" to know a lot about me obviously really have no clue, based on their comments. But, that is their prerogative to espouse their supposed knowledge. The thing is to those who do, in fact, know the truth that individual looks quite uninformed and emotionally-driven. At this point those who do know the truth have begun to wonder exactly why that person would choose to act in such a way.

However, now that I have said all that it has occurred to me to note that "parents" come in all types. There are step-parents, siblings who take care of their younger siblings, aunts and uncles who step in when the true parents aren't taking care of business, friends of the parents who step in the same as blood relatives, and even significant others of biological parents. The truth is being a biological parent has less to do with raising a child than a true concern for a child's well-being.

[Athena]

I think the issue most parents take is when non-parents provide unsolicited advice.

Also, how can you compare a business decision with raising children? Raising children is always emotional because children are living, breathing, beings with emotions of their own. Part of being a parent is providing for their emotional well-being.

I have no problem with unbiased advice, but unexperienced? Unless you are educated in the field of child psychology (and even then I would have trouble taking advice from someone with only "book knowledge,") you are not taking guesses on MY kid.

No, some parents take issue when non-parents state opinions, period. When I talk about how I think a child should be raised, you'll know when I'm addressing you specifically, because I'll say "Kathy, this is what I think you should do". But when I get blasted for not having children simply for making a general statement about how I think things should be, that's not advice, that's just my opinion. There IS a difference. Parents, in my experience, don't always differentiate and end up taking things personally. I'm not so arrogant as to tell people (especially those I don't know) how to raise their kids, unless they ask, in which case, I'm just giving them things to consider.

Suggesting that non-parents don't have valid opinions about parenting is the same bullshit logic behind the opinion that men shouldn't comment on abortion, or that foreigners shouldn't have opinions on American politics. You don't have to experience something to have some useful information about it.

I think you misunderstood my comparison to a business situation. I was simply illustrating that there are circumstances where a lack of experience can benefit a perspective. I wasn't making a direct correlation to parenting. I wasn't saying "you shouldn't be emotional". That'd be unreasonable. I'm simply saying, "I might see some things you haven't considered because I'm not personally involved". I've got friends who are parents, who come to me for advise, because they know I'm a reasonable and objective person. It's, in part, because I don't have kids that allows me to be objective when they come to me and say, "Hey, am I being reasonable, here?" I'm not saying I know better, because I don't. I know different...and sometimes, that's a good thing.

[Mom of 4]

4.) Mom: Yessss what a great idea trust a city full of strangers with your 9 year old son but give him a quarter to call home if something bad happens. NICE

I'm not addressing this in the interest of world peace. The cell phone phenomenon makes me smile. :p

I'd like to preface the following with this: I'm 25. "Things were different when we were kids" does not apply to me. I was a kid, like, 10 years ago. My sister was a kid even more recently. The world now is, for all intents and purposes, the same world it was then. We lived in the suburbs of a major city, enjoyed a great deal of freedom and...*Dun dun dun*...didn't have cell phones. Hell, I wasn't even rockin' a pager until I was 15 or so, and that was just so my parents could get a hold of me. The thing was worthless in the event I had to get hold of them.

There are pay phones everywhere. A quarter is a relative luxury for some kids! It's all about the collect calls. :p Seriously, though...In the event that something bad is going down with your kid, you've got to have a better game plan than, "Give me a ring and sit tight, honey." Speaking from personal experience, when a bad guy is after you, you don't call home and stay where you are so your parent can find you. If you're smart and were instructed properly, you run, screaming "Help!" at the top of your lungs to the closest house or business and call home once you're safe.

Generally speaking, cell phones provide more false security than anything, given the frequency of bad reception areas or the possibility that the thing gets lost or broken. Not saying your kid shouldn't have one (I'd have loved one, personally), but it's a mistake to view them as some necessary tool for childhood adventure, and it could spell absolute disaster to build your safety plans around them.

Okay...I'm finally done.

LOL Athena I agree with most of your post. My point about the cell phone was that if you are going to try this kind of experiment with your 9 year old child the least you can do is give him a damn phone to use in case something does happen to him.

I don't believe 9 year olds need cell phones per say except perhaps if you are using said 9 year old to prove some point at their expense. My kids all have cell phones and all of their cell phones have GPS's in them just in case. No I am not a paranoid neurotic mom either. :D It was a service the cell provide offered for a couple bucks a month so I said yes. How many times have we seen cell phone pings used to track people or trace a bad guys whereabouts after a crime? Many victims have been able to call 911 on their cell phones unbeknown st to their attackers. That's a hell of a lot easier to do than finding a pay phone to use.

Finally the part that really bothered me about this dip shit mother was her comment about not giving him a cell phone because she didn't want him to lose it! Evidently her cell phone is just too valuable to lose but her son? Not so much. It didn't sit too well with me I guess.:p

[Rotten Apple]

No, some parents take issue when non-parents state opinions, period. When I talk about how I think a child should be raised, you'll know when I'm addressing you specifically, because I'll say "Kathy, this is what I think you should do". But when I get blasted for not having children simply for making a general statement about how I think things should be, that's not advice, that's just my opinion. There IS a difference. Parents, in my experience, don't always differentiate and end up taking things personally. I'm not so arrogant as to tell people (especially those I don't know) how to raise their kids, unless they ask, in which case, I'm just giving them things to consider.

Well Athena, if they asked for advice, it wouldn't be unsolicited.
Also, if you are giving an opinion, you should be prepared for differing opinions. And if those people believe that them being parents makes their opinions more qualified, that is their opinion also. Aren't they just as entitled?

My statement about unsolicited advice was a general statement aimed at no one in particular. Before I was a parent, I was guilty of it too. In the grocery stores when I said, "I would totally take that screaming toddler out to the car and give him a good swat on the diaper." (Though I as never an idiot and went up to the parent and said that.) Its different when its YOUR screaming toddler in the buggy at the grocery store. Only YOU know that the kid has a raging ear infection, you don't have a sitter and you need to get some medicine and food for the house before you head home. He's screaming because he is in pain, not because he is being a brat.

But I'm sure there are other parents here who have had a "helpful" stranger or two come right up to them and say things like that. My worst experience was on an airplane. I almost punched a lady out.;)

You don't have to experience something to have some useful information about it.

True, but when given a choice, I think most people would give the advice from the experienced person more weight.
For example, I know you have had a hand in raising your sister in her teen years. I can see myself coming to you and saying, "Athena, Johnny is rebelling and fighting in school, I've tried X, Y, and Z. What do you think I should do? What worked for you?" But I am more likely to go to Angel to say "Angel, Little Johnny is biting other children in daycare and will not share toys, what do you think I should do?"

Why? Well, because Angel has experience with toddlers and you have experience with a rebelling teen.

And, when referring to myself, anyone who does not know me personally, or who only gets their information second-hand, is simply assuming certain things. This is not directed at you, Kathy. :) It's just a general statement. The truth is, for one to assume I have no experience in raising a child would be a grave mistake on that individual's part. Even certain people on this site who "claim" to know a lot about me obviously really have no clue, based on their comments. But, that is their prerogative to espouse their supposed knowledge. The thing is to those who do, in fact, know the truth that individual looks quite uninformed and emotionally-driven. At this point those who do know the truth have begun to wonder exactly why that person would choose to act in such a way.

However, now that I have said all that it has occurred to me to note that "parents" come in all types. There are step-parents, siblings who take care of their younger siblings, aunts and uncles who step in when the true parents aren't taking care of business, friends of the parents who step in the same as blood relatives, and even significant others of biological parents. The truth is being a biological parent has less to do with raising a child than a true concern for a child's well-being.

I'm confused as how I should respond to you Chris.

but for the second half of your post, I will say that I agree. there is no magic that happens when you push a baby out of your vagina or your sperm fertilizes an egg. That is proven regularly on our front page. I'm a great mother and I've never given birth. :D

[TXChris]

I'm confused as how I should respond to you Chris.

No worries, Kathy. It was not directed at you in any way. I just took the opportunity to use what was said in your post to make a statement. The whole paragraph was really a statement in general to those in the populace who make the mistake of assuming they know things about another because of second-hand information instead of actually truly knowing that person. Obviously second-hand information is always lacking in its completeness. Assuming, itself, is easy to do with the one-sided stories we get on this site. And, truthfully, assumptions are a bitch when they're wrong. :)

but for the second half of your post, I will say that I agree. there is no magic that happens when you push a baby out of your vagina or your sperm fertilizes an egg. That is proven regularly on our front page. I'm a great mother and I've never given birth. :D

Is it bad that I found humor in the phrase "push a baby out of your vagina?" :D

[Morbid]

Even certain people on this site who "claim" to know a lot about me obviously really have no clue, based on their comments. But, that is their prerogative to espouse their supposed knowledge. The thing is to those who do, in fact, know the truth that individual looks quite uninformed and emotionally-driven. At this point those who do know the truth have begun to wonder exactly why that person would choose to act in such a way.

I never claimed I know a lot about you, I said you would be surprised how much I do know. As for my motives? I like stirring shit. Plain and simple. It drives traffic. Even though I do get a bit of enjoyment watching swivel make you bawl your little hands up and cry like a baby, I don't really care who comes out on top on any of these "debates". Your opinion on pretty much any subject under the sun don't mean shit to me. There is absolutely no emotion motivating my actions or comments, in regards to you, at all. Just a love of web traffic, lower Alexa scores and increasing page views.

If you or "the other people who know the truth" think that it has anything more to do than that, PLEASE quit flattering yourselves. I could care less who you are in love with.

[TXChris]

I never claimed I know a lot about you, I said you would be surprised how much I do know. As for my motives? I like stirring shit. Plain and simple. It drives traffic. Even though I do get a bit of enjoyment watching swivel make you bawl your little hands up and cry like a baby, I don't really care who comes out on top on any of these "debates". Your opinion on pretty much any subject under the sun don't mean shit to me. There is absolutely no emotion motivating my actions or comments, in regards to you, at all. Just a love of web traffic, lower Alexa scores and increasing page views.

If you or "the other people who know the truth" think that it has anything more to do than that, PLEASE quit flattering yourselves. I could care less who you are in love with.

Wow! And so the childishness continues. I wouldn't expect less. :D

It's funny how you took what I said so personally and then hid behind web traffic and increased page views as an excuse. There must be a grain of truth to it, concerning you, I suppose. Otherwise I'm sure it wouldn't have bothered you so much that you just felt you had to make such a post out of it. Meh, it is what it is and you are what you are. Personally, childishness to this level is something I choose not to engage in. It's a waste of much more productive time and energy. Cheers.

[Morbid]

Yeah, yeah. I am hiding behind web traffic from what exactly, Chris? Spit it out. Please. Are you implying that I have something for Athena? Athena, what are you telling this guy? lol!

It's a waste of much more productive time and energy.

That is too funny considering the source.

[Rotten Apple]

Jerry! Jerry! Jerry! Jerry!

Oh wait...:ouch:

[TXChris]

Yeah, yeah. I am hiding behind web traffic from what exactly, Chris? Spit it out. Please. Are you implying that I have something for Athena? Athena, what are you telling this guy? lol!

Athena? What? Seriously? Dude, are you that insecure? I was referring to this statement exactly:

There is absolutely no emotion motivating my actions or comments, in regards to you, at all. Just a love of web traffic, lower Alexa scores and increasing page views.

So, um, yeah...I think you need to consider why you thought that I was referring that you had something for Athena. lol Wow. The amount of ridiculousness espoused on this site at times just blows my mind. Now, if we can get back on topic...

[Rotten Apple]

So, um, yeah...I think you need to consider why you thought that I was referring that you had something for Athena. lol Wow. The amount of ridiculousness espoused on this site at times just blows my mind. Now, if we can get back on topic...

Ummm...Chris...don't hit me, but I thought you were talking about her too.

Because well, ummm...nevermind.

BACK ON TOPIC!!!:great:

[Morbid]

Athena? What? Seriously? Dude, are you that insecure?

Seriously. Trust me, Chris. Insecure isn't one of my attributes. Now, if you would like to clear the air and just state state what you mean, you may end up looking less socially retarded.

[TXChris]

Seriously. Trust me, Chris. Insecure isn't one of my attributes. Now, if you would like to clear the air and just state state what you mean, you may end up looking less socially retarded.

Wow! Really, dude? Are you trying to tell me that you STILL do not understand what I was referring to even after I quoted the exact statement for you??? :surprised:

I guess I'll just quote it once more:

There is absolutely no emotion motivating my actions or comments, in regards to you, at all. Just a love of web traffic, lower Alexa scores and increasing page views.

I'm really not sure how much more clear I can make than that right there.

Edit: Just in case, I'm going to try to make it clear. You stated that your personal lashing out at me had only to do with increasing page views, etc. My assertion is that you are merely using that as a reason to hide your true social ineptness. In this case everyone knows how long-standing the friendship between you and swivel is. It's only to be expected that you would continue where he left off when I made the decision not to engage him at any future point. It's OK. I understand where you're coming from, but in all truthfulness, it really is quite a bit on the side of ridiculousness.

Now, can we PLEASE get this thread back on topic? It's obviously a great subject as can be witnessed by the other comments.

[Morbid]

I'm really not sure how much more clear I can make than that right there.

Sure you can. Just fucking say it. Quit being a pussy about it.

[Athena]

Well Athena, if they asked for advice, it wouldn't be unsolicited.

Smartass. ;) You said that you thought parents mostly just take issue with unsolicited advice. I was saying that I was stating opinions, I don't give unsolicited advice...and some parents still take issue because they don't differentiate between an opinion and advice.

Also, if you are giving an opinion, you should be prepared for differing opinions. And if those people believe that them being parents makes their opinions more qualified, that is their opinion also. Aren't they just as entitled?

Opinions are entitled by their very nature, but their legitimacy is ALWAYS debatable. That's what I'm doing here. I'm not saying, "You can't tell me that my opinion as a non-parent doesn't mean shit", I'm saying, "that opinion is ignorant". Let's be real - some opinions are more valid than others. If someone wants to believe that women are stupid or that the AZ Cardinals are the best team in football, that's their right. But I'm going to explain why I think their opinion is based in ignorance.

And, just so that we remain on the same page, my issue is not with parents who find the opinions of other parents more qualified. They ARE more qualified. My qualm is with parents who will dismiss my opinion outright, simply because I don't have my own children.

True, but when given a choice, I think most people would give the advice from the experienced person more weight.

Oh, of course. Like I said, I'm not saying that my opinion as a non-parent is better or even equal in value. I'm just saying that it's not completely dismissable simply because I don't have kids and, in some cases, there may be an advantage to consulting someone who doesn't have kids, especially in a case where a parent's perspective can be severely skewed by emotion.

[TXChris]

Sure you can. Just fucking say it. Quit being a pussy about it.

lol Why don't you try reading the edit.

[Athena]

...In this case everyone knows how long-standing the friendship between you and swivel is. It's only to be expected that you would continue where he left off when I made the decision not to engage him at any future point.

See? Not "Athena". Not anything to do with "Athena".

Step off my balls, y'all.

[Morbid]

lol Why don't you try reading the edit.

Oh my god. You are truly retarded. Out of all the things I thought you were going to say...you thought this was about swivel??? Holy shit you got that guy on your brain. Maybe you should just suck his dick and be done with it.

Seriously, my god this is too funny.

[TXChris]

Oh my god. You are truly retarded. Out of all the things I thought you were going to say...you thought this was about swivel??? Holy shit you got that guy on your brain. Maybe you should just suck his dick and be done with it.

Seriously, my god this is too funny.

Meh, now that you have said your peace and I have said mine maybe we can get this thread back on topic? :)

[Rotten Apple]

Meh, now that you have said your peace and I have said mine maybe we can get this thread back on topic? :)

NO!

Not until I point out that nurseronda has thanked people 1,426 times in a month and a half. :D

[Morbid]

Meh, now that you have said your peace and I have said mine maybe we can get this thread back on topic? :)

Absolutely. I think I actually like you better just because you truly did surprise me with a curve ball. :)

I'm done. Back to who is a better parent!

[TXChris]

NO!

Not until I point out that nurseronda has thanked people 1,426 times in a month and a half. :D

nurseronda is the shit! :D

[nurseronda]

NO!

Not until I point out that nurseronda has thanked people 1,426 times in a month and a half. :D

Hey, someone has to thank these wonderful people for making people laugh and think in different ways. I sure have had fun reading all these posts and thanked them to let them know I enjoy their insights and the laughs. Hey, I even got to the point of seeing the there are no new posts to read...and I did it in that month and a half...:D

[impqueen]

you thought this was about swivel??? Holy shit you got that guy on your brain. Maybe you should just suck his dick and be done with it.

TXChris, i gotta warn you, it looks nothing at all like the body of Christ. I mean, um, I'm just sayin'.

[TalkingJesus]

TXChris, i gotta warn you, it looks nothing at all like the body of Christ. I mean, um, I'm just sayin'.

Yeah - Morbid assures me, Swivel's dick looks nothing like me.

[impqueen]

:::Imp gently shoves Jesus into the Erin Markes thread to catch the subreference ;):::

[Miss. Hill]

On the topic, my point of view as a parent raising children, this women took an unnecessary risk. Should CPS be called, that's tough, she was wrong in my opinion, but I'll say no. I don't think she was neglectful or abusive just poor judgement.

I understand the chances of him making it home out way the chances of him being harmed, but why take the risk? I have been in NYC and I live in a large city now, I get a little scared taking the bus or walking streets downtown, and I'm a grown women. I have been approached by weirdo's peddling shit or saying "what's up baby" or whatever. I wouldn't expose my 9 year old to that, no way!

Every child is different and it's a parents responsibility to gage their abilities. A child who is deemed responsible should be given such privileges as going to a friends house, the park, the neighborhood store, riding bikes, things along these lines. BUT dropping your 9 year old off miles from home throwing him some money and a map, is this seriously a debate?

I don't believe all parents are over protective, I make my decisions based on my knowledge of my child's personality and maturity level. As parents it's our responsibility to keep our children from harm not to say, hey let's see what happens if I throw you in the middle of a possible dangerous situation!

We do have to let our children learn through life experience but decisions need to made age specific and child specific, all children are different. Common sense of the parent is a necessity unfortunately not a requirement.