The Parenting Thread II - Advice, Tips, Etc

[NoCalMike]

I think when it comes to "free range" there is a huge umbrella for what it means exactly. I remember being about 10 years old and being allowed to play outside with friend w/o supervision. We were pretty much allowed to roam the neighborhoods during the day.  I suppose there was a safety in numbers situation that helped as I grew up on a street where 4 houses in a row had kids I all went to school with and we all tended to hang out.  

 

Perhaps it also comes down to where you live and the perceived safety of that specific suburb. 

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

The whole free range parenting thing seems to fall into two camps:

 

1. CPS going after really poor parents

2. CPS being used as a weapon by really nasty neighbors

 

I have no interest in "back in my day" debates.

[PleaseBlitz]

1 hour ago, PeterMP said:

 

1.  And I'm saying that free range child raising started to die well before 30 years ago so what has happened in the last 30 years is almost irrelevant, and we had a much broader participation by government in finding children going back more than 30 years ago.

 

2.  In addition, even from 1997 to 2011, the number of stereotypical kidnappings of kids in the age range of 2-17 is actually down and nobody is talking about.  The only reason stereotypical kidnappings are even between 1997 to 2011 is an increase of kids from 0-2, which is irrelevant to the conversation.

 

Again, the study shows that the incidence of stereotypical kidnappings during the 1990s and more recently is, to quote the DOJ, ""statistically equivalent."  I agree that any increase (or decrease) for kids 0-2 is irrelevant.  

 

 

Quote

 

3.  Yes the odds are low.

 

4.  Are you really arguing the fact that before the raise of child labor laws, kids didn't free range because they had to work is anecdotal?  Before widespread mechanization of farming that on farms that kids were an important part of the labor pool?  Those are known historical facts.

 

I've now said over and over again that everything I've said covers the past 30 years, so anything you want to say about pre-1990's is fine, but has nothing to do with anything I've said.  Just red herrings on your part to try to expand the discussion to something you can defend.

 

Quote

 

5.  Lastly, your "upside" is your pre-conception.  There is no evidence that kids that are free ranged better learn to function more independently.

 

(And again, I'll make the point that you can have free play and not free range.)

 

There is a lot of evidence that the opposite-approach, i.e., helicopter parents, have profound, life-long negative effects.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/overly-controlling-parents-cause-their-children-lifelong-psychological-damage-says-study-10485172.html

 

Edited March 30, 2018 by PleaseBlitz

[Dont Taze Me Bro]

I'll echo not letting your child, especially a young one spend too much time on any smartphone and especially avoid YouTube at all costs.   It seemed harmless 6 years ago when my daughter was 4 yo to put some apps on our phones for games she could play.  Especially when we would go out to eat and knew we would be out for 2-3 hours (depending on if friends/family were meeting us), cause well kids get bored real easy.

 

The problem was when we upgraded phones.  I made a bad decision, since my old iPhone wasn't worth anything on the trade-in, I deactivated it and let her have it to play games on.  If you do this, make sure to limit their time on it to a set amount of time per day (1 hour) with additional time if you go out to eat.  We pretty much did this, she has always been very active, so it really wasn't a problem.

 

Until she got to be about 8 years old.  Then she would try to sneak it to bed, stuff like that.  Then the YouTube videos started.  And it was fine in the beginning, like My Little Pony shows, then she got into Minecraft and started watching two streamers (one husband and wife named Pat and Jen and some other guy DanTDM), we had watched those with her and they were kid friendly, so it seemed pretty harmless.

 

Then she started watching whats called Reaction Videos, where it shows a show/movie with the youtuber being recorded too, little box somewhere on the screen, where they react to whats on there.  She was watching a my little pony one and the dude doing the video was like in his 20s, seemed pretty weird and creepy.  So we banned those videos.  She would sneak them, we would punish her, etc.  

 

She said a real bad words and slang phrase and in her defense, had no idea what they meant and didn't know they were inappropriate.  Found out she had heard them on YouTube a while back when it played some videos that were "related", you know how it puts a list of similar related videos on the right side when watching.  Needless to say, the smartphone is banned forever.  The next one she gets will be her real phone to use and I don't think it's going to be a smartphone either. 

 

She is banned from YouTube until she is old enough to comprehend and understand all the slang, curse words, etc. out there and know it's bad.  So for at least another 3-4 years.  She's just not ready for that.  Best thing I did was take it away, and if I had it to do over, I'd never have let her have the phone or watch YouTube.  

Edited March 30, 2018 by Dont Taze Me Bro

[PleaseBlitz]

49 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

I think when it comes to "free range" there is a huge umbrella for what it means exactly. I remember being about 10 years old and being allowed to play outside with friend w/o supervision. We were pretty much allowed to roam the neighborhoods during the day.  I suppose there was a safety in numbers situation that helped as I grew up on a street where 4 houses in a row had kids I all went to school with and we all tended to hang out.  

 

Perhaps it also comes down to where you live and the perceived safety of that specific suburb. 

 

Oh, yes, there is a huge spectrum.  Hell, I remember being 12 and hoping on my bike and going to a basketball court/shopping mall with arcade that was a good 8 miles from my house every day during the summer.*  Currently, there is a big park about 1/2 mile from my house that borders my development.  I think I'll probably let my daughter go there by herself around 7 or 8, but probably a lot depends on her specific characteristics.  

 

* I obviously did not know at the time, but 3 of the guys I played basketball with regularly are currently in prison. 

[NoCalMike]

5 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

 

* I obviously did not know at the time, but 3 of the guys I played basketball with regularly are currently in prison. 

 

Haha.

 

Yeah there was also that early teenager era before I could drive where it was normal for my friends & I to hop on a bus and take it to the mall or movie theaters.  We didn't seem to rely as much on our parents to take us places unless it was night.

[PleaseBlitz]

25 minutes ago, Dont Taze Me Bro said:

I'll echo not letting your child, especially a young one spend too much time on any smartphone and especially avoid YouTube at all costs.   It seemed harmless 6 years ago when my daughter was 4 yo to put some apps on our phones for games she could play.  Especially when we would go out to eat and knew we would be out for 2-3 hours (depending on if friends/family were meeting us), cause well kids get bored real easy.

 

(and the rest)

 

I think this is my biggest fear.  We let my daughter watch Frozen and stuff on a tablet, in moderation.  What I fear is just the kind of things she'll be exposed to on the internet.  YouTube is bad enough, but right now she's 2.  In 10 years, who the **** knows what is going to be out there?  Mother****ers are eating Tide Pods today, in 10 years it's going to be ten times worse.  

[Dont Taze Me Bro]

Just now, PleaseBlitz said:

 

I think this is my biggest fear.  We let my daughter watch Frozen and stuff on a tablet, in moderation.  What I fear is just the kind of things she'll be exposed to on the internet.  YouTube is bad enough, but right now she's 2.  In 10 years, who the **** knows what is going to be out there?  Mother****ers are eating Tide Pods today, in 10 years it's going to be ten times worse.  

 

Yeah, it started with Frozen too, with YouTube way back.  As she got older and into Minecraft, then those videos.  And to be honest, we monitor everything she watches/does on the internet/Netflix/Hulu.  It really wasn't a problem until recently.  We would catch her in the act of watching something she wasn't supposed to, then punish her, take away all electronics, except the use of her Chromebook for school.  

 

So it was nipped in the bud before it got really bad.  I just keep on checking and involved, that's all one can really do.

[PeterMP]

1 hour ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

Again, the study shows that the incidence of stereotypical kidnappings during the 1990s and more recently is, to quote the DOJ, ""statistically equivalent."  I agree that any increase (or decrease) for kids 0-2 is irrelevant.  

 

 

 

I've now said over and over again that everything I've said covers the past 30 years, so anything you want to say about pre-1990's is fine, but has nothing to do with anything I've said.  Just red herrings on your part to try to expand the discussion to something you can defend.

 

 

There is a lot of evidence that the opposite-approach, i.e., helicopter parents, have profound, life-long negative effects.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/overly-controlling-parents-cause-their-children-lifelong-psychological-damage-says-study-10485172.html

 

 

1.  When the DOJ says they are equivalent, they are including the 0-2 age bracket.  From 0-17, there is no change in stereotypical kidnappings, but there has been a decline in the 3-17 bracket that has been offset by an increase in the 0-2 bracket.

 

2.  It isn't a rea hearing to throw the conversation off.  It is reality.  The increase in societal concern over child welfare couples with changes in laws and behavior going back more than 30 years.  Increase usage of law enforcement efforts to find missing kids, the involvement of the FBI in kidnapping, child labor laws, and the increase involvement of parents in their kid's lives have been happening for many decades.  Not for 30 years.  I was a kid 30 years ago.  I knew plenty of kids that had significant restrictions on their movement as a kid.

 

3.  Most things in lives, and especially complex things like raising kids, are not actually classified into binary behavior.  You can NOT be a helicopter parent AND NOT free range your kids.  You are creating a false choice.  Again, free play does not have to equal free range.

 

(And again, I'll make the point that "modern" free range parenting isn't really ever what happened very much due to the decrease of kids playing outside in general (more use of electronic toys) and the decrease in the size of families.  You are creating a false binary choice that isn't relevant to anything that ever happened much historically.)

Edited March 30, 2018 by PeterMP

[PeterMP]

1 hour ago, NoCalMike said:

I think when it comes to "free range" there is a huge umbrella for what it means exactly. I remember being about 10 years old and being allowed to play outside with friend w/o supervision. We were pretty much allowed to roam the neighborhoods during the day.  I suppose there was a safety in numbers situation that helped as I grew up on a street where 4 houses in a row had kids I all went to school with and we all tended to hang out.  

 

Perhaps it also comes down to where you live and the perceived safety of that specific suburb. 

 

There is a fundamental difference between allowing a group of 10 year olds that the parents know well play in a neighborhood and allowing a 9 year old alone walk to a park.

Edited March 30, 2018 by PeterMP

[PleaseBlitz]

12 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

1.  When the DOJ says they are equivalent, they are including the 0-2 age bracket.  From 0-17, there is no change in stereotypical kidnappings, but there has been a decline in the 3-17 bracket that has been offset by an increase in the 0-2 bracket.

 

2.  It isn't a rea hearing to throw the conversation off.  It is reality.  The increase in societal concern over child welfare couples with changes in laws and behavior going back more than 30 years.  Increase usage of law enforcement efforts to find missing kids, the involvement of the FBI in kidnapping, child labor laws, and the increase involvement of parents in their kid's lives have been happening for decades.  Not for 30 years.  I was a kid 30 years ago.  I knew plenty of kids that had significant restrictions on their movement.

 

3.  Most things in lives, and especially complex things like raising kids, are not actually classified into binary behavior.  You can NOT be a helicopter parent AND not NOT free range your kids.  You are creating a false choice.  Again, free play does not have to equal free range.

 

(And again, I'll make the point that "modern" free range parenting isn't really ever what happened very much due to the decrease of kids playing outside in general (more use of electronic toys) and the decrease in the size of families.  You are creating a false binary choice that isn't relevant to anything that ever happened much historically.)

 

I don't think you are even reading my posts, or at least not understanding them, so please stop quoting me and responding to things that have nothing to do with anything I've actually said.

 

Thanks.

[PeterMP]

12 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

I don't think you are even reading my posts, or at least not understanding them, so please stop quoting me and responding to things that have nothing to do with anything I've actually said.

 

Thanks.

 

I've perfectly read and understood your posts and everything I've said is actually related to what you are saying.

 

Whether, you've read and understood mine I guess is a different question.

[PleaseBlitz]

1 minute ago, PeterMP said:

 

I've perfectly read and understood your posts and everything I've said is actually related to what you are saying.

 

Whether, you've read and understood mine I guess is a different question.

 

Well I guess we disagree on that point as well because your posts indicate otherwise.  In any event, you can continue your discussion of things that have nothing to do with anything I've said without me.  

[The Sisko]

So after literally three or four years we’ve finally been cleared to look at kids to adopt. **** just got real and I’m terrified! ?

[NoCalMike]

32 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

There is a fundamental difference between allowing a group of 10 year olds that the parents know well play in a neighborhood and allowing a 9 year old alone walk to a park.

 

Oh I totally get that, I was just making an observation that with this kind of issue, every parent is going to follow their own instinct/guidelines.  I guarantee even though I was with a group of 10 years olds, there were plenty of adults who drove by who thought in their head "who the hell is allowing these kids to roam the streets?" with a disgusted look on their face.

[Zguy28]

1 hour ago, Dont Taze Me Bro said:

I'll echo not letting your child, especially a young one spend too much time on any smartphone and especially avoid YouTube at all costs.   It seemed harmless 6 years ago when my daughter was 4 yo to put some apps on our phones for games she could play.  Especially when we would go out to eat and knew we would be out for 2-3 hours (depending on if friends/family were meeting us), cause well kids get bored real easy.

 

The problem was when we upgraded phones.  I made a bad decision, since my old iPhone wasn't worth anything on the trade-in, I deactivated it and let her have it to play games on.  If you do this, make sure to limit their time on it to a set amount of time per day (1 hour) with additional time if you go out to eat.  We pretty much did this, she has always been very active, so it really wasn't a problem.

 

Until she got to be about 8 years old.  Then she would try to sneak it to bed, stuff like that.  Then the YouTube videos started.  And it was fine in the beginning, like My Little Pony shows, then she got into Minecraft and started watching two streamers (one husband and wife named Pat and Jen and some other guy DanTDM), we had watched those with her and they were kid friendly, so it seemed pretty harmless.

 

Then she started watching whats called Reaction Videos, where it shows a show/movie with the youtuber being recorded too, little box somewhere on the screen, where they react to whats on there.  She was watching a my little pony one and the dude doing the video was like in his 20s, seemed pretty weird and creepy.  So we banned those videos.  She would sneak them, we would punish her, etc.  

 

She said a real bad words and slang phrase and in her defense, had no idea what they meant and didn't know they were inappropriate.  Found out she had heard them on YouTube a while back when it played some videos that were "related", you know how it puts a list of similar related videos on the right side when watching.  Needless to say, the smartphone is banned forever.  The next one she gets will be her real phone to use and I don't think it's going to be a smartphone either. 

 

She is banned from YouTube until she is old enough to comprehend and understand all the slang, curse words, etc. out there and know it's bad.  So for at least another 3-4 years.  She's just not ready for that.  Best thing I did was take it away, and if I had it to do over, I'd never have let her have the phone or watch YouTube.  

Glad I'm not the only one on here with similar experience. I have a program called Covenant Eyes on all our internet devices with restrictions to avoid circumvention. Excessive texting is the latest one for my oldest. And I mean excessive.

9 minutes ago, The Sisko said:

So after literally three or four years we’ve finally been cleared to look at kids to adopt. **** just got real and I’m terrified! ?

Its a massive life change. Exciting and terrifying at the same time. But it is such a blessing. God bless you for adopting.

[PeterMP]

25 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

 

Oh I totally get that, I was just making an observation that with this kind of issue, every parent is going to follow their own instinct/guidelines.  I guarantee even though I was with a group of 10 years olds, there were plenty of adults who drove by who thought in their head "who the hell is allowing these kids to roam the streets?" with a disgusted look on their face.

 

I guess my point would be that in general that's not what people are pushing back against, and it isn't what you are seeing reported where authorities have gotten involved (where to my knowledge nobody has actually gotten into trouble or had their kids taken).  It is things like 9 year olds on the NYC subway alone and a 9 and 6 year old walking to a park by themselves.

 

Depending on your behavior, there might have a been a sense of who is letting these kids lose without supervision, but I don't think ever (and even today), there is a push back against that sort of thing from a safety stand point and that most people don't think kids should be allowed to do such things.

 

(And again, realistically, today it is probably safe to have a 9 and 6 year old walk to a park, but that's at least partly due to the effort we as a society make to keep kids safe, and those things haven't developed over the last 30 years only, but over the last 70 years.)

Edited March 30, 2018 by PeterMP

[Dont Taze Me Bro]

****ing unbelievable timing of my previous two posts.........just went up to her room to check on her (started Spring Break today) and the door was locked, she opened it and admitted to having the Chromebook, but insisted on opening it for me, I guess she thinks I'm a dumbass.  Grabbed it and she was watching reaction videos on YouTube again.  

 

Looked at the history and it appears that she has been sneaking them on there at least a couple of times the past two weeks.  I came very close to snapping the chromebook over my knee and tossing it in the trash.  Instead I just smiled and told her that I hope she has fun at her birthday party tomorrow because I have a feeling after mom comes home and we discuss what happened that she is going to have a extremely boring spring break.  

 

[LadySkinsFan]

54 minutes ago, The Sisko said:

So after literally three or four years we’ve finally been cleared to look at kids to adopt. **** just got real and I’m terrified! ?

 

Such great news! I'm sure you will be great parents and the children you bring into your family will make for a joyful life!

[LadySkinsFan]

23 minutes ago, Dont Taze Me Bro said:

****ing unbelievable timing of my previous two posts.........just went up to her room to check on her (started Spring Break today) and the door was locked, she opened it and admitted to having the Chromebook, but insisted on opening it for me, I guess she thinks I'm a dumbass.  Grabbed it and she was watching reaction videos on YouTube again.  

 

Looked at the history and it appears that she has been sneaking them on there at least a couple of times the past two weeks.  I came very close to snapping the chromebook over my knee and tossing it in the trash.  Instead I just smiled and told her that I hope she has fun at her birthday party tomorrow because I have a feeling after mom comes home and we discuss what happened that she is going to have a extremely boring spring break.  

 

 

I have no idea what my granddaughter is doing. I am hopeful that her parents are watching her internet usage. Her dad is pretty computer savvy, don't know about my daughter.

 

My role is to let her parents parent. I will keep her busy helping me decorate my new apartment.

[Dont Taze Me Bro]

Just now, LadySkinsFan said:

 

I have no idea what my granddaughter is doing. I am hopeful that her parents are watching her internet usage. Her dad is pretty computer savvy, don't know about my daughter.

 

My role is to let her parents parent. I will keep her busy helping me decorate my new apartment.

 

We keep a good eye on her.  Though I slipped and didn't catch it the last time a week or so ago.  Had another talk with her and what not, made her go clean her room which looks a laundry hamper and lego bombs went off.  So, one positive, she's not giving me any **** about cleaning it spotless and not lollygagging around to avoid cleaning it.

[Why am I Mr. Pink?]

Currently having this debate in my house hold. Daughter is 6, only child. We live in a town house/apartment complex neighborhood with "okay" kids running around. parents dont monitor them, sometimes 3 year olds wander into the street. In the summer, I buy lots of cheap water guns for the kids to play with. Feed a couple kids I know dont eat regularly. 

 

I want to let my 6 year old run around, scrap her knees, climb trees etc bc I think she is pretty sheltered. Not enough interaction w other kids, no siblings and we have moved every year. 

 

Wife wants one of us to be out there at all times when out daughter is out front. Which basically means I will have to be out front the whole time bc I am the only one that plays w her while wife has some mental and health issues. I wonder how much her position is based off the fact that duties then fall to me while she sits in the house enjoying tv. 

 

No right answer, no wrong answer imo. 

 

My daughter watches Cookie Swirl C which are adults or kids playing w dolls and making voices etc. And the minecraft stuff. No harm in them but I am worried suggested videos will lead her away from that to "fail videos" to violent videos ....  

 

I think kids being exposed to technology is important. Learning how to use different apps/interfaces/etc  

[Springfield]

My oldest (3) gets to use the iPad with supervision.  We let him watch YouTube kids, Netflix kids and Nick Jr on it.  So far, with YouTube, he’s gone from enjoying happy birthday videos, to surprise egg videos, to Ryan’s toy review, to some other weird toy ****.  He likes watching kids play with toys.  Everything with YouTube kids seems innocent at the moment but I don’t trust google one bit.  I try to steer him to Netflix or Nick Jr because the content on that seems to be more vetted.  He only gets maybe 30 minutes of videos a night before bed, after dinner and other family time (games, play, etc).  Not sure how much screen time he gets at grandmas house during the day but I’d imagine it’s a bit.

 

One thing that sucks is the work/family dynamic.  I work 10 hours a day, 7-5.  I go to the gym after work every day for about 1.5 hours.  So I get home and it is nearly 7, our youngest goes to bed at 8 and oldest at about 9.  1-2 measly hours with our kids a day.  That sucks.

[PleaseBlitz]

1 minute ago, Springfield said:

 

 

One thing that sucks is the work/family dynamic.  I work 10 hours a day, 7-5.  I go to the gym after work every day for about 1.5 hours.  So I get home and it is nearly 7, our youngest goes to bed at 8 and oldest at about 9.  1-2 measly hours with our kids a day.  That sucks.

 

That's about what I get.  I usually work 9 to 8, daughter goes to bed at 9.  I almost always put her to bed, that way I get time with her alone and wife gets a break.  

[zoony]

2 hours ago, The Sisko said:

So after literally three or four years we’ve finally been cleared to look at kids to adopt. **** just got real and I’m terrified! ?

 

Congratulations!