No grapes. No balloons. No fun. No resilience.
Cautious parents warn that even balloons can be a danger to kids. AJC photo
AJC reporter Helena Oliviero has an interesting story about free-range children – an emerging catch-phrase for raising kids with more freedom and fewer knee pads, a philosophy with which I agree. (I have explained here before that my mother essentially raised herself as her mother died when she was 4 and her father when she was 16. Her father never learned much English and my mom never learned much Italian. She roamed free and wide, and raised her four kids in similar fashion. Somehow, we have all our limbs today and a pretty good degree of sense.)
So, I probably have been far less hovering with my own kids as a result of my own free-form childhood. When my oldest daughter was little, we often took her to the nearby playground. I was stunned one week when a mother refused to allow her 4-year-old daughter to eat a grape I was offering. “She could choke,” the mom told me.
But I was even more taken aback a few weeks later when my daughter held out one of her balloons to a new pal and the mom jumped up as if Molly were offering her child a live lobster. “Balloons,” she cautioned me, “were choking hazards.”
My youngest two are now 10, an age when kids begin seeking more freedom and autonomy. I have certainly given them more control over their school lives, not looking over homework unless asked and not editing their writing assignments. (My 18-year-old did not show me any of his college essays, probably recalling the terse discussions I had with his older sister over “which” and “that” and over her fondness for exclamation points. I am still under the influence of Miss Conrad who told me in 9th grade to save exclamation point for either “War Declared!” or “I’m on fire!”)
We often talk here about parent involvement in schools, but it is a phrase without precision. Many schools seem to define involvement as fund raising or field trip chaperoning. Others want parents to become part of the daily school life, practically unpaid paraprofessionals. (In my experience, few want parental involvement extended to any real input on the sorts of classes or teachers their children need.)
Lately, I have had several conversations with parents where I was amazed at how much they knew about not only their child’s minute-to-minute class activities, but who in the class is allergic to tree nuts and who talks too much during Spanish. They still sit with their 10-year-olds and do homework with them. They read the same books and discuss. (As the mom in the crowd with two young adults, I refrain from pointing out that it’s difficult to maintain that level of shared experiences with your kids – especially boys – when they become teenagers. Then, they don’t want to even share their cell phone number with you.)
They have lots of earnest discussions with teachers about their child’s motivation and moods. They call when their child complains about being teased by a classmate, unsure of what is bullying and what is normal playground society.
When school began this year. I probably received 100 e-mails about new “products” parents ought to buy to improve their child’s school experience, from high nutrition snacks to video study guides. I now have a stack of newly released books on my desk about how to get your child into a good college.
I once interviewed Dr. Spock about the rare parent I would sometimes see at the playground who turned their kids loose, opened a novel and never looked up. Or, even rarer but more memorable, the parent who would pop open a beer and light a cigarette while their kids ran around without any shoes and sometimes no underwear.
Some of the kids turned out fine, I told Dr. Spock.
He said those kids learned something very important to a happy life — resilience.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2011 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
41 comments Add your comment
southerngirl
October 3rd, 2009
8:06 pm
My daughter is in fifth grade and I am starting to distance myself from her and her school work. I can’t sit beside her in class and help her step by step with assignments so why should I do it with homework. I let her do the work, I double check it and what is wrong I tell her and try to explain what is wrong with it. If she fusses about it then I say “turn it it yourself, it is your work and grade not mine”. I have seen a GREAT improvement in my child’s schoolwork and attitude. I see other parents who have been doing this since first grade and those are the kids that do the best in school. I work in the school and had a hard time taking this advice but I do see that the teachers were correct.
TW
October 3rd, 2009
8:49 pm
Maureen – I’m sure your doing a great job. Don’t worry about it too much, there’s more than one way to skin a cat.
Maureen's accountability metric
October 3rd, 2009
9:23 pm
No disagreements here, especially as a body of evidence is growing that kids who play in the dirt develop stronger immune systems. And there is a lot, especially when it comes to school, to be said for parents who have expectations instead of “concern,” as those who have expectations seem to be more willing to let their children be responsible for cleaning up their own academic messes, than the “concerned” parents who stay up until three in the morning-priding themselves on it even-to do the “child’s” project, only to have said child come to school and not be able to tell you the first thing about the project that was allegedly the “child’s”.
As an aside Maureen, did you mean to say “refrain from pointing out” instead of “reframe from pointing out”?
If you did, feel free to delete this post after the correction is made. If I am ever to add anything to the debate on this blog, either in terms of style or substance-and far be it for me to suggest these musings, valid though I believe they generally are, even begin to push the needle on that front-I’d like those kudos to come from the merit of the words I write, and not from being the “grammar police”.
Although I must admit that “dieing” instead of dying thing really, and I do mean really, struck a nerve as just being completely unacceptable, if for no other reason it came across as a “don’t know” rather than a typo.
KS
October 3rd, 2009
9:25 pm
I believe she’s trying to start a discussion and not look for reassurance… Anyway, I grew up a “free-range kid”, even though it wasn’t labeled back then. I walked to school all 12 years, roamed around the neighborhood outside until dark in elementary school, rode my bike to the closest strip mall to hang out in middle school, and took the bus and subway to downtown DC to go to museums in high school. I’m sure my parents weren’t aware of half of what I did.
My kids are only 4 and 6, so I hover some, but I also try to make them figure some stuff out. I hang out while they’re playing outside mostly because the 4 year old runs in the street without thinking and since no one plays in the street anymore, more people speed in the neighborhoods. (It seems to be a cycle — people don’t let their kids play in the street because of speeders, and those same people speed in the neighborhood because the streets are clear.) I do think that’s part of the difference between my childhood and my kids’. If there were more kids outside playing together, I wouldn’t feel so nervous letting them go out to play. But when they’re the only ones, I feel like there’s an invisible target on them. Anyway, I talk to them about which neighbors that I know in case they ever need help and what to do in case a stranger approaches them, in the hopes of one day giving them more freedom. Based on their responses, I give them more choices if I feel like they seem ready to handle them.
Maureen's accountability metric
October 3rd, 2009
9:27 pm
This post is just to illustrate, what I think can now be considered as rock solid a law as the law of gravity, and that is, if you post about a post being lost, the post that references the post being lost, will always post. Post haste.
Maureen's accountability metric
October 3rd, 2009
9:29 pm
Need I say more when it comes to lost posts? Obviously no postmortem needed on this front.
jodee
October 3rd, 2009
9:42 pm
I live in the suburbs where there is a great deal of pressure on parents to be “good” moms and dads. I admit to hovering when my kid was little, perhaps because we had fertility issues and I knew he would be the only one…..so I wanted to get it “right”. I had to distance myself from the “No grape or balloon” crowd, though, because they were making me crazy. Who can be that perfect? And is that perfect, anyway?
Once, when my son was in Cub Scouts, we went to Charleston with the pack to sleep aboard an aircraft carrier. I roomed with the other mom who came, along with her two daughters. When reveille sounded in the morning, I jumped out of bed and turned on the light. She quickly jumped up and turned it off….and went through an elaborate 10 -minutes waking-up routine that included stretching toes and such. Then she dressed the girls in outfits made (by her) out of the same fabric that she and her husband and her Cub Scout son wore on the tour. They looked like the kids in “The Sound of Music” — all matchy matchy. For a second I felt totally inadequate, but then I realized that my son would fare just as well jumping out of bed in the men’s quarters, throwing on the clothes he’d worn the day before, and having a blast climbing all over guns and cannons and stuff….even without a helmet on!
I teach middle school, and I am amazed at what parents tell me in conferences—” We worked on this all weekend!” “We studied for an hour for that quiz!”. Seriously. Let the kids learn how to learn! The sooner, the better. Support them– yes. Sit with them for hours every night—no.
IOC
October 4th, 2009
12:55 am
Kids, your President is corrupt, simple as that.
Maureen Downey
October 4th, 2009
7:23 am
MAM,
Thanks for catching reframe – the price for posting on my terrible home computer and using the spellcheck feature without carefully reviewing which substitute I chose.
As for why posts go into the filter, I think length is one factor. I also often find that posts that include proper names go into the filter.I have no idea why. We use a good filtering program that catches most of the Viagra pitches and the porn sites. Unfortunately, it also catches a lot of legitimate posts,
Maureen
catlady
October 4th, 2009
7:45 am
I agree to a large degree about the need for more, appropriate “free range” for children. It seems like we have two types of parents: the totally self-absorbed, neglectful kind (they take free range to the point of letting the kids be raised by wolves) and the Chinook helicopter (Olympic level hovering) parents. So little common-sense room!
Unless the conseqences are truly life-threatening, give you children some space, let the solve some problems, get wet and dirty, devise their own games. Set the parameters, then back off. Let your child tell you if they need homework help (and then give it judiciously), monitor their “technology” use, and let natural consequences follow if they don’t take care of business.
Jessica
October 4th, 2009
9:51 am
As much as I would like to have “free-range” kids, I don’t feel that I CAN do that. As parents, we are constantly being made aware of new threats to our kids’ safety and well-being, and it’s hard to know which ones deserve our attention and which are blown out of proportion. Also, our parenting skills (or lack of them) is always being judged by someone (friends, teachers, grandparents, other moms) so many parents feel enormous pressure to over-parent. If a kid is injured, gets in trouble or fails at something, other people will blame the parents for not supervising the kid or disciplining enough. I have a feeling that many of those critics will be the same people who complain about helicopter parents.
V for Vendetta
October 4th, 2009
9:55 am
Catlady,
I 100% agree. It seems as though the room for common sense is rapidly shrinking. Some of the pressure is societal, but some of it is imposed upon us by our government. It is hard to raise independent children in the Nanny State. Some elementary schools don’t even let kids play organized sports anymore! (If kids pick teams, there will inevitably be a child picked last. We can’t have that!) I have a friend who is a PE teacher; you should hear the insanity going on in elementary PE!
Kids need to be kids. As the parents, we should guide, discipline, and TEACH them, but we should also allow them to fall from time to time. After all, you can never learn to pick yourself back up if you never fall in the first place.
Food for thought
October 4th, 2009
11:36 am
I’ll also add that I read about a study this week (wish I could remember where so I could share) that kids need to PLAY – create their own games; create their own rules. It’s how they learn social skills, etc. We’ve hovered and over-scheduled our kids to their detriment, IMO.
For me, I was very much like KS above – I walked all over the place between 5 and 10, taking the bus ad the subway alone in Boston by 15. I was ok. However, I didn’t let my kids go into Atlanta without me until they could drive and even then it was always with friends, to a specific destination for an event, instead of just roaming around like I used to. We didn’t have them in many organized sports through the years, so they spent lots of time creating pick-up games in the neighborhood – another parent told me that that didn’t really happen ’til we moved in. We didn’t have cable or a computer when they were very young, so they had to do a lot of free play – they developed great imaginations. They need to be kids, and you need to work on giving them wings, not crutches.
Sees the future
October 4th, 2009
12:24 pm
There is free range and then there is neglect, and its a very short walk between the two. And unfortunately, as Jessica pointed out, the determination will likely not be made by you, but by the teacher, doctor, social worker, and other authority figures who you have to answer to when your child is involved in an accident on the playground that could have been prevented but wasn’t because, as the witnesses pointed out, you “had your nose in a book and never looked up once.”
Most people who hover are just trying to be good parents and they have drawn their line of comfort in a place different from yours. Your attitude is smug, judgmental, defensive, and reeks of rationalization. Not pretty on any level.
philosopher
October 4th, 2009
12:38 pm
Maureen- as a nurse, I really worry about people questioning safety rules that have been learned the hard way…through the death or serious injuries of children. What is there to say for us if we turn our backs on evidence-based safety. I, for one, do not consider the fact that I survived childhood running wild on a bicycle with no helmet a legitimate excuse to risk my child’s life to give her the freedom to do the same…not knowing now what I do..a skniined knee is fixable, a brain, more often than not, is not. Yes, I wish I didn’t know that walkers are deadly- that balloons and grapes and hotdogs, if not provided safely, have killed many children. I WISH I had not seen small children brain damaged for life because their parents refused to buckle them up or put a helmet on them. I cannot pretend not to know what I know and then let my children be free-range (am I the only one who thinks of chickens with that term?! ) Now, that said- I do not feel I have to step in with every moment of her life in school and friendship- but having raised older kids, I have learned when I should step in…not very often. I don’t judge parents who let their kids run loose without supervision..they are, after all, THEIR kids and therefore THEIR business…but I DO get very angry at parents who do not protect theri kids from known, avoidable dangers…there are enough unavoidable dangers to keep hospitals and emergency rooms full of injured kids. Children depend on us to get them safely to adulthood, do they not?
Maureen Downey
October 4th, 2009
12:43 pm
Philosopher. I certainly agree with you on helmets, child safety seats and seatbelts. I think the news story — as I read it — was more about the notion of exploration.
I agree that it’s a balancing act and dangerous to err too far on either side.
philosopher
October 4th, 2009
1:58 pm
I agree- with the balancing act and I apologize if I didn’t make my point…when we start being “taken aback” at the notion that someone will not allow a toddler grapes and balloons, it leads the reader to believe that you are appalled at such over-protective behaviors. As nurses-we spend so much time trying to educate parents about the seriousness of such “unbelievable” dangers and mostly spin our wheels, that to hear these things taken in this light is worrisome- I guess it’s really the examples used that set me off…they are examples of real life dangers too often poo-pooed by parents for whatever reasons.
elementary teacher
October 4th, 2009
5:58 pm
After reading the article and comments here, I had to chime in. In some respects, I don’t have a place to say anything because I don’t have children of my own yet. But, in dealing with all different types of children and parents through being a teacher, I have learned a lot about things that are wrong with the way we are raising kids these days. I admit, I was a free range kid — but I grew up in a town of 6,000 people where everyone knew everyone, a little different. As a teacher, I have come across way too many children who can’t take responsibility, can’t solve their own problems, and can’t take “losing the game.” It seems that too many parents are spending their time protecting their children and fixing everything for them, that these kids are growing up thinking and acting like nothing can touch them. I get parents who get upset when their child gets in trouble for hitting someone and they come after me. Instead, why don’t you talk to your child about appropriate behavior, and teach them responsibility? I didn’t make them hit someone! Also, I have never heard of ANYONE dying from eating a grape (although I’m sure it has happened) but just because one person in a million people will choke on it, doesn’t mean you need to deny every child of it for fear of them choking. They’ll choke on anything if they don’t eat it properly, so teach them how to eat! If you teach your child responsibility, respect, understanding, and safety — then THEY will make the right choices, and you won’t have to do it for them to keep them safe.
sees the future
October 4th, 2009
6:06 pm
Well said Philosopher. She can back pedal now, but the tone of her article was that these parents are overly protective and deserving of our ridicule. But we know that grapes and balloons are choking hazards and we also know that play ground equipment can be very dangerous IF CHILDREN PLAYING ARE UNSUPERIVISED (as in a parent who is reading and never looks up from her book). Children aren’t chickens–they are curious little people who need supervision.
As for the parents of the middle school kids who “are backing off,” guess what, the research tells us that your child needs you now more than ever. The child who followed your rules without question at nine, is now a middle schooler, awash with hormones, and daily pressured by every possible source from friends to television, to step out there and take some serious risks. This is not the time to let them be “free range.” That’s the road to drug experimentation and teen pregnancy. Ask any middle school teacher–they can tell the difference between the kids who do a little hovering and the kids who roam free. And its grossly unfair to lump all protective parents into the category of the silly lady who dressed her kids like the Sound of Music. If you want to make a point, you need to keep your examples fair and reasonable, otherwise, you just seem like a person who is making excuses for being– well honestly–for being neglectful!
catlady
October 4th, 2009
6:43 pm
Cut the *&%@! grape in fourths, for crying out loud! Or teach your kid to chew instead of watch TV and swallow!
I think I was something of a free range parent (before it was cool). When I was in grad school, the 8 year old would sometimes take the city bus in front of her school (crossing with a crossing guard) and ride around the city to UGA, get off the bus, walk through a part of North Campus, and come to my building.
There were, of course, some things that they were not allowed to do because there was a history of problems in the neighborhood (couple of unsupervised bullies. One ended up killing a girl a few years after we left). But they spent a great deal of time outdoors in our back yard, running and digging and constructing hide-outs (from what were they hiding? Only their imaginations know) and all the other things “normal” kids do. Or maybe the “normal” kids are the untypical now?
I am back living in the country now, and I am shocked at how many of the kids sit in front of the TV/Computer/Nintendo from the time they get home until bedtime. No exercise. No free play. No sunshine. Just the flickering of the tube reflected in their increasingly vacant eyes.
A free-thinking mom
October 4th, 2009
7:10 pm
Sees the future. I can see your future too. Neurotic kids. You see danger everywhere. So will they if you don’t relax.
Proof positive
October 4th, 2009
7:49 pm
Great topic. My contribution to argument that parents are overly protective: I interviewed a grad student for an internship. Her mother came. Said she was afraid her daughter couldn’t find her way around Atl. Guess what. She didn’t get the job.
Back off folks. You’re smothering your kids
philosopher
October 4th, 2009
9:16 pm
Elemementary teacher- perhaps you should be the student here for awhile-”I have never heard of ANYONE dying from eating a grape (although I’m sure it has happened) but just because one person in a million people will choke on it, doesn’t mean you need to deny every child of it for fear of them choking”. I am sorry but you do not have your facts and this kind of statement keeps people ignorant of risks- Talk with an EMT, talk with pediatricians, look up the information on the American Academy of Pediatrics before you undermine all the hard work we have done to educate the public. While adults can make all the stupid decisions they would like in their lives and take all the risks they choose…when they are responsible for small children, they should make responsible decisions- Yes, at a reasonable age, you can teach a child to eat a grape carefully- until that point YOU must make that grape a different size than it is…the perfect size to block your little ones’ trachea! And I don’t know about you, but I never carried a knife to a playground just in case someone offered a grape to my toddler, I simply said, ” “no thank you”. I obviously feel very strongly about this but I will repeat- a child who is in my care has a right to be protected from anything that I know is a physical danger that can cause death or permanent damage…if I know it, I will not ignore it! Emotional risks, non-life-threatening physical risks, social risks, and educational issues are an ENTIRELY different issue. Last point- if that one child in a million was YOUR child, do you really think you would say that it was a reasonable risk…I think not!
sees the future
October 4th, 2009
9:28 pm
Actually grapes are one of the top ten things that kids choke on every year. Facts are facts.
Kids need supervision, parents are tasked with that job. I’m sure the mother did cut the grapes up before she gave them to her kid when she was at home–the story here is that Maureen offered the child a whole grape, not a cut up grape when they were at a playground. I think at 4 the child was capable of chewing it, but that was her mother’s call, not mine or Maureens. But certainly, at younger ages, its a real risk; and to be honest I did cut my toddlers grapes in half, my kids wore a helmet on their bikes, I supervised them at the play ground, and I sliced their hotdogs lenghtwise until they were about 4 or 5. I also supervised their activities in middle school, let them drive (after driver’s ed) and date in highschool (without me! ha!), and went to parent day when they were in college and grad school. I did this because I love them and if 1 out 100,000 kids a year were going to die eating whole grapes, that one kid wouldn’t be my kid.
Proof, you are also making extreme examples. A mother accompanying her child on a job interview is not a reasonable example of careful parenting verses “free range” parenting. Its just too extreme. Maybe its not as rare as it once was, but its not the same as a mother worrying that her child will choke on a balloon–that actually happens a lot more often than we want to acknowledge, especially with very young children who love to “mouth” balloons.
Maybe parents do sometimes go too far, I’m sure many do, but a lot of parents do go far enough. The challenge of parenting is to find that happy medium where the parent is comfortable, the kid is safe, but everybody is still functioning at a normal, happy level. Maureen’s belief that the mother with the grape was preventing her child from developing resilience is just absurd. It’s hard to be resilient if your dead. Its also hard to give up long held beliefs, especially about parenting. My own parents thought I was outrageous in 1985 when I required my children to sit in car seats–we never had car seats or even seat belts in the 1950s and we were just fine! Blech.
The point here is that you need to respect other parents’s comfort zones about the safety and security of their children. Maureen’s original post was full of ridicule for parents who want to protect their kids–and held up her own nearly orphaned mother’s childhood as an example of childhood happiness. That’s just silly and it’s wrong.
You can be as nasty and rude as you like, but it only proves that you are a nasty and rude person. It doesn’t make you right and it certainly doesn’t prove that you are a good parent or that people who think differently from you are not.
mom2alex&max
October 5th, 2009
8:50 am
Maureen, this phrase:
“Many schools seem to define involvement as fund raising or field trip chaperoning. Others want parents to become part of the daily school life, practically unpaid paraprofessionals. (In my experience, few want parental involvement extended to any real input on the sorts of classes or teachers their children need.)”
Says it all. I have been wanting to put my slightly annoyed feelings into words, and I couldn’t. That’s exactly what bothers me about the expected parental involvement, at least in my kids’ school. Show up, do what we tell you, donate your money, be quiet. Almost like being the mother of the groom huh? Show up, shut up, and wear beige.
Maureen Downey
October 5th, 2009
9:04 am
Mom2alex&max and catlady, II I can ever figure out how to create a box alongside this blog to highlight great comments, you would both be there today.
Mom2alex&max, The mother of the groom metaphor is spot on, as my British friend always says. I will quote that endlessly. (It’s right below this comment: “Almost like being the mother of the groom huh? Show up, shut up, and wear beige.”
And catlady’s description of parenting styles — free range to the point of letting the kids be raised by wolves and the Chinook helicopter (Olympic level hovering) parents — was brevity and poetry.
When you all launch blogs – or if you have them now — let me know. I would love to follow you. I know that Cere has a great blog. If anyone else here does, please let me know.
Maureen
Maureen
mama-mia
October 5th, 2009
9:08 am
I believe that Maureen used an unfortunate illustration of free range parenting when she related here experiences with grapes and balloons. Cutting grapes for a toddler or not letting them mouth balloons does not affect their self reliance or resiliency. Similarly, requiring your child to wear a helmet or buckle up in the car does not erode their self concept.
However, refusing to consider letting your child (of appropriate age) get themselves to school or friends’ houses because of irrational fears that aren’t backed up by fact, doing their projects/homework for them consistently, not letting them fail at school work or friendships or scheduling them in too many adult led activities does result in insecure, ineffective children.
Free range parenting is actually about teaching your child how to KEEP THEMSELVES safe. That would include teaching them the importance of things like not mouthing balloons, chewing grapes (and all food) completely, wearing helmets, making good decisions with known and unknown adults, and always buckling up in cars. Then, when, based on your judgment, they have shown the consistent ability to follow the rules and keep themselves safe, you begin to back off rather than finding some other reason to hover.
We live in a small urban town where everyone pretty much knows everyone else. All of our schools are within walking distance of our house and the place is crawling with crossing guards. With my children, I spend a great deal of time teaching them the rules of the road, rules with strangers, rules if you get lost, rules for bike safety, etc. When they demonstrate to me that they know these rules, can follow them consistently, and most importantly, REALLY understand the reasons for these rules I let them walk or bike to school. The age at which they attain this ability to keep themselves safe varies depending on the child. My oldest was not ready until 5th grade because he is a space cadet. My middle child was ready in 3rd grade because she is very organized and self aware. The jury is still out on the youngest.
Now, if I lived in a sprawled out suburban area that was not so close knit and did not have a culture of kids walking/biking to school on their own, I would probably not let them go solo.
Re homework, I seldom get involved with it unless there is a specific problem. I don’t read the books my kids are reading unless they tell me that they want me to read it because it is so awesome. I do research content if I have a hunch that a book might be inappropriate for their age level (I did a good bit of research on the Twilight series, for instance). With projects, I always let my kids fly solo first. If they blow it, I helicopter the next project (but still require them to do the work) to help them learn what a good project looks like. Then on the following project, they are on their own again. I’ve found that this approach works pretty well because each solo project is better than the previous one, and after a few months of this.. they get it and a can prepare an excellent project on their own… and I can stop messing around with hot glue guns.
Well, that was a bit rambling, but I wanted to make the point that free range parenting is not just opening the door and kicking your kids out until dusk. It is about making the effort to teach them to take care of themselves, taking the time to really find out if and when they can take care of themselves, and then having the courage to let them do it. In some ways and in some stages, I think free range parenting takes more effort than helicopter parenting because you spend so much time/mental energy thinking through how to effectively teach safe independence and evaluating their readiness to go it alone. On a day to day basis, it’s often simpler to just mentally check out, drive them around and over schedule them than to take the time out of your day to really teach safety and resilience.
what's right for kids???
October 5th, 2009
9:33 am
Do you think that if we sat with our children while they ate dinner/lunch/the damn grape, that they wouldn’t choke? Gee, my duaghter has been eating grapes, whole, since she was 18 months. I sit with her while she has her snack. I also know how to remove said grape if it does get lodged in her throat; but it hasn’t because we sit together, talk about our day (well, she’s two, so I talk and she chimes in).
Yes, children need supervision; they also need freedom. Give them the guidelines, enforce the guidelines, and then let them figure things out, age appropriately, for themselves.
Also, I do suggest you all read the article~nowhere does it say that children shoud roam around the car without a car seat or ride a bike, skateboard, etc. without a helmet. I believe that’s why we were given the link to the article. You know, so that we could read the whole thing and respond to it?
philosopher
October 5th, 2009
9:58 am
@what’s right for kids??? The TITLE of Maureen’s comments is “No Grapes, No Balloons, No resillience- Her comments imply plainly that we’re really out of line withholding grapes and balloons from toddlers! You know …if you read MY comments, that my concerrns are ONLY for physical safety of kids- NOT living their lives for them.They were also a plea for people like you to stop undermining what the healthcare profession has learned through evidence-based knowledge to be unsafe activities for children. Follow this logic, if you would…when I grew up, there were no seat belts used,…the majority of us survived…but now, with the knowledge we have, should I not buckle my child safely?…of course, I should. And you buy that one because we in the healthcare and emergency care profession have finally got that message across-to most, anyway. So, NOW, we are trying to get across to you that too many kids are dying from inhaled grapes and tiny balloon pieces after they pop in a child’s mouth…how long will it take for the message to get across and save a few more toddlers?- a little longer now…thanks!
what's right for kids???
October 5th, 2009
10:29 am
Although the comment was not necessarily for your benefit, Philosopher, that you should read the article. Did you read it? It talks of the same things that you are trying to get across…except for the grapes, which I still think are overly cautious.
Kawla
October 5th, 2009
11:39 am
I have to say the Moms on the playground who are reading or chatting on the phone and never look up drive me crazy. It is always their child who is bullying others or needs help every other second on the equipment and looks to me to step in. (trying to get attention any way that they know how? ). Watch your own children and dont expect others to do it for you!
philosopher
October 5th, 2009
2:48 pm
Whatever… at least take a good CPR course…where you will learn that for all your smugness, the Heimlich manuever is often unsuccessful.
whatever...
October 5th, 2009
10:55 pm
Wow! Hey philosopher you seem to be the smug one here. And the Heimlich, performed properly, is often successful. Maybe be a little less condescending towards people who have views that differ from your own?
philosopher
October 6th, 2009
6:20 am
Not condescending at all, just frustrated-The dangers of grapes to toddlers is NOT based on opinion but on FACT. Believing or saying that grapes or balloons are safe for toddlers will not make it so. And when a kid is involved “often” is not an acceptable success rate…especially if it didn’t have to happen in the first place.
Whatever...
October 6th, 2009
12:35 pm
So lets just put ‘em in a bubble or lock ‘em in their rooms so nothing will ever happen to them!
concerned teacher
October 7th, 2009
12:35 pm
Forget the choking hazard a grape causes. We should worry about the heads exploding over merely talking about grapes. The point that needs to be made is that giving a toddler a bowl of grapes and sending her off to the playground with a map is not good parenting, but neither is avoiding everything that might potentially be harmful. A little common sense is called for here. That child will eventually eat a frekin’ grape, so cut it up while she’s young or better yet, the two of you can do it together.
philosopher
October 8th, 2009
8:26 pm
A bit of philosophy…Some folks will tie their dogs up on chains in the back yard, some will let them run free to poop in the neighbors yard and/or get run over, some will carry them in their purses and feed them table food. And some will keep them safe from what would kill them and let them be dogs within the confines of their house and yard. And so it goes for children, as well. And I will never be without a job!
kiri
October 9th, 2009
6:17 pm
I was that mom who brought a novel to the playground while my kids played. Yes, I did look up from time to time, and nope, nothing bad ever happened. My older one learned to be responsible and look out for his little brother, and both boys learned how to play creatively, without me having to be right there next to them on the climber. They are both very independent, self-confident kids, and I think they are quite resilient. Has anyone ever read “Slacker Mom” or “The Three Martini Playdate”? Both books are funny, but are spot-on with good sense about parenting that does not involve hovering.
kiri
October 9th, 2009
6:22 pm
@philosopher — about those infamous grapes. You’re right, kids can choke on them. However, that doesn’t mean it’s reasonable for a four year old to be denied grapes. The mother on the playground was right there — she could have let her child eaten the grape, perhaps with a reminder to chew it well, and would have been able to step in in the really unlikely possibility of a choking incident. (Think how many four year olds there are in this country. Think how many of them ate grapes today. Multiply that by 365. The number of four year olds who had fatalities with a grape in a year — pretty small number by comparison.)
That little girl’s mother sent her a strong message that the world is a scary place. Even grapes are scary! She could have handled it so much better.
philosopher
October 9th, 2009
8:54 pm
“She could have handled it so much better”….sad words to say of a mother told her child will have permanent brain damage from anoxia while choking. But …you’ve been given the facts… rationalize,opinionize it away or cut the grapes, it’s your child.
jckdaw
October 10th, 2009
9:20 am
Here are some more facts:
From The American Academy of Pediatrics:
Do not feed children younger than 4 years round, firm food unless it is chopped completely. Round, firm foods are common choking dangers. When infants and young children do not grind or chew their food well, they may try to swallow it whole. The following foods can be choking hazards:
Hot dogs
Nuts and seeds
Chunks of meat or cheese
Whole grapes
Hard, gooey, or sticky candy
Popcorn
Chunks of peanut butter
Raw vegetables
Fruit chunks, such as apple chunks
Chewing gum
Statistics:
Injury and death rates
The majority (80 percent) of children who died from airway obstruction injuries in 1999 were children ages 4 and under.
A total of 776 children ages 14 and under died in 1999 from airway obstructions:
More than 569 children died from suffocation, strangulation, and entrapment (in household appliances and toy chests).
Almost 197 children died from choking (food and nonfood).
In 2000, sixchildren, ages 4 and under, died from choking on a toy or toy parts (half of which were balloons). In addition, three childes died from toy-related suffocation.
On average, 5,000 children, ages 14 and under, are treated in hospital emergency rooms for airway obstruction due to toys and toy parts annually. The majority of these children (75 percent) are ages 4 and under.
Where and when
Most airway obstructions in children occur at home.
Suffocation is more common in the summer, while choking is more common in the winter.
Children most often choke on food items.
Balloons are the most common cause of toy-related choking death among children of all ages.
The majority of infant suffocation tends to occur where they sleep (60 percent).
Strangulation by window blind or drapery cords most often occurs when the cord hangs near the floor or crib. The majority of children who strangle by window covering cords are ages 3 or under.
More than half of drawstring strangulations (i.e., on the hood or neck of a jacket) occur when they become entangled on playground slides.
Since 1990, at least 57 children have died because they became entrapped in bunk beds.
Opinion: First, the child described was four, so eating grapes should have been OK. Second, the inflated balloon is not dangerous–what is dangerous is the kids chewing on the deflated balloon. Playing with a balloon on a playground is OK, but maybe not taking it up to the child’s room later.