Wpuld some children benefit from a bit of 'benign neglect'?

Children were in just as much danger from paedophiles in the fifties and sixties as they are now. In fact it's possible they were in more danger as most people didn't know such predators existed and those that did often didn't protect children as it was seen as a private family affair. My parents believed that all they had to do was verbally warn off a known predator who we came into contact with all the time. Of course they were wrong but they didn't know that. People didn't understand how these predators thought and acted.

Children are far less trusting and more aware of stranger danger these days. If they play in groups I don't see how they're anymore at risk than in the past.

I accept that roads are more dangerous due to the increase in traffic but there are pelican crossings now that stop the traffic completely. They didn't exist when I was young. Children are more at risk because they don't go out enough. They're not taught to take responsibility for their safety. Stop, look and listen is second nature to us because we did it so often. Our children have to have that opportunity.

I like the phrase benign neglect. It's exactly what children need. They need the chance to take risks, to fail and succeed, to be independent, indeed to be bored.

I think you are being realistic Vegasmags. We used to walk to school when we started. I was 4 and brother 8/9. We could cross the road without help and hunt for conkers in people's gardens. Remember making stories up about tiny creatures in tree holes.

If my Gch walked to school now it would not be long before a car knocked them down. As for the park it is not safe for lone children. There are just too many people in the country and too much traffic. Not all of us can afford to have acres of country side to play in sadly.

We like to listen to the Famous Five stories on CD on long car trips. The grand kids love to hear about the adventures the children had, free from adults. They went on a camping trip on a train with bikes...alone. They take a rowing boat over to a deserted island to camp...alone. The grumpy, busy adults ignored them apart from supplying ginger beer and jam sandwiches. Great but fiction, perhaps even in those days.

Children must be safe and yet as free as possible to develop their imaginations that is the dilemma we are faced with. The 1953 is not 2013. { though to judge by the news paedophilia is nothing new.}

It was a godsend when we moved from a house on a busy main road to a village when the boys were 5 and 7. There was a playing field, tennis courts and the common. They made friends quickly and I made friends with their mums. I could usually find them in one haunt or another. Those years stood them in good stead.

My 2 youngest grandsons, nearly 5 & nearly 7, seems to enjoy a balance. They are taken to after-school and weekend sporting activities that they enjoy. At home, and with the benefit of lots of outdoor space, they are mostly left to explore and amuse themselves. I've occasionally been alarmed at the 'hands off' parenting style they experience, but they are both very happy and settled little boys with a wealth of (semi-dangerous ) practical skills beyond their years.

My own children had a great deal of freedom to play out with their friends, but they did have tennis and swimming lessons which were not provided at school. My DGS has a very different life, in that his mother works full time, so that he goes to breakfast club and after school club. I was fortunate enough to be at home when my children were small, so that I could supervise them, if from a distance. So many mothers now have to work that it is very difficult for my DIL even to organise a friend coming home for tea.
My DGS is also an only child, and rather shy, so that organised activities such as Cubs have been for him a very important way of making friends.
There is now so much more traffic on the streets that playing out is much more hazardous and, certainly in my street, some neighbours get very upset if their precious car is hit by a stray football. The nearest park is not one you would be comfortable allowing young children to go off to by themselves, as it is usually full of badly behaved teenagers and assorted yobs.

I don't think it's always "keeping up with the Jones's" that makes people enrol their children in activities. I think they may be trying to prevent them from becoming totally housebound and obsessed with computer games. Also, they may be trying to give them opportunities they didn't have in their own childhood. (For example, neither of my parents could swim and I only learned to swim about 20 years ago. I was therefore very keen that our own children should, as early as possible, learn to swim and so we paid for swimming lessons.

However, I don't think it's neglectful to let your children get on and amuse themselves for periods of time. If they are always being entertained, they become unable to entertain themselves. Every spare moment doesn't have to be filled with worthy projects.

But, like Hilda I think it's important for parents to encourage, and preferably to engage in, activities such as hiking, cycling, swimming, playing sports, camping, etc., etc., so that as children get older they have a range of interests and enthusiasms which don't necessarily require spending lots of money. (This isn't typical of my own childhood, where most free time was spent watching TV, drawing or reading.)

I think you are right greatnan too much molly coddling is going on, and I speak from experience as I too was one of those parents and now I am paying the very heafty painful price!!

Of course I am not advocating that parents ignore their children, don't listen to them read/read to them, etc. - just that they leave the children some space to be themselves.

From the age of 8 to 15 my daughter trained for over 20 hours a week as a gymnast, only stopping when she'd been injured to often to carry on. My son on the other hand thrived on healthy neglect. We lived in the country and he would go out in the morning and come back at night and it was years before I heard about some of his adventures (falling through the ice etc.!) Recently I told him that I felt a bit guilty that he'd spent so much time amusing himself and he assured me that his childhood had never been less than perfect - possibly he's just easily pleased?
Our grandson has started complaining that no one has ever asked him if he WANTS to go to his gym club and football club, but he has been told he can give them up if he wants to. Apart from anything else they all cost money!

Agree with you Greatnan - up to a point .
I encouraged my DCs to play by themselves and walk home from school, but I also made time to read books to them when they were little and when they were older we encouraged their interests outside school - my DH spent countless hours sailing with the older two (younger one wasn't really interested, but got grade 8 piano instead).
I think even if they don't achieve great heights with these outside activities, it gives them a basis for interests to carry on in adult life and a way of socialising with other people, all of which is an anti-dote to stress at work.
The important thing is that children should enjoy what they do and have time to just be themselves too.

I agree with al these comments. It isn't necessary to provide constant attention, stimulation and entertainment for children - it stifles their imaginations. They can be left to their own devices from a safe distance, increasing according to age, with no ill-effect and they can find out more about themselves and what interests them.

Quite agree Greatnan. My daughters had to get themselves to school from the age of 10, 8 and 7 by train and then bus. There were strict rules and contingency plans, but as my Dad would have said, it put hairs on their chests! Parents who lived within walking distance of the school drove their little darlings. At home they spent hours with friends in the garden just 'playing'. GC's here in Oz run home from school, grab a snack and then join all the neighbourhood children across the road and play for hours up and around a huge tree using their imagination and ingenuity. As a child, I was never happier than when making a camp underneath my Mum's washing airer covered with a sheet. Too much 'stuff' around these days - a little more freedom and time to use imagination and just be kids is what they need. Oh well, just off to take the 4 year old to ballet class

There is a modern phrase, 'Helicopter Parents' the sort that are always whirling around their children leaving them little time to develop independence.
Yes, I believe children need time to get bored.....to use their imaginations and find their own inner motivations. However, coming from a set of parents who paid little attention to how we spent our time (other than making us go to school - which was a pleasure to get away from them at times) I do think its great when Mums and Dads show a real interest and then support children in pastimes hobbies etc. I also think that once a child has shown an interest in say dance or swimming then they should be gently 'encouraged' to pursue it for a decent amount of time before being allowed to give it up at the first slight upset. Ferrying unwilling or tired children from one activity to another just becasue the parents are in a sort of 'keeping up with the Joneses is plain daft.
To be honest, as with all things its a balance.

Please forgive type in title - I am no on my own computer!