Dubious Advice in Slate
Oct. 13th, 2025 08:59 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ndrosenThere is an advice column in Slate in which Ms. Nettles responds to a mother who is Deeply Concerned about her ex letting their nine year old child walk two blocks on his own. The advice columnist cites what the American Academy of Pediatrics now says about children under ten walking on their own (they’re against).
I can understand parents being worried about a child being run over trying to cross a street without remembering to look both ways. If children under ten never cross streets unsupervised, I will grant that a few lives may be saved each year. However, we need to consider the costs of not letting children develop a sense of self-efficacy and partial independence. These costs may begin with the unhappiness of not being able to go places and overcome challenges, but they may extend to lives being lost as well. If children who aren’t allowed to walk on their own become at higher risk for depression, which seems plausible, lives may be lost through outright suicide, from seeking refuge in drugs, or from otherwise failing to acquire the skills and self-confidence to deal with life’s challenges.
I walked several blocks to school when I was five years old, and this involved crossing William Street (which was not a busy thoroughfare, but it was still a good idea to look both ways). I paid attention, and in due course I grew up with some sense of responsibility, and some ability to deal with risks and obstacles; I might have done worse if I had not been allowed to walk and cross streets without adult supervision. I did, as I recall, walk to school together with two other first graders from the immediate neighborhood, but I also walked on my own. When I was nine years old, we acquired a beagle, and I took him on walks through the neighborhood; no one thought that this was beyond the capacity of a boy under ten.
I’m glad that there is at least one nine year old out there who has already learned to walk and to cross at least one street on his own, even if his mother is upset about it.
I can understand parents being worried about a child being run over trying to cross a street without remembering to look both ways. If children under ten never cross streets unsupervised, I will grant that a few lives may be saved each year. However, we need to consider the costs of not letting children develop a sense of self-efficacy and partial independence. These costs may begin with the unhappiness of not being able to go places and overcome challenges, but they may extend to lives being lost as well. If children who aren’t allowed to walk on their own become at higher risk for depression, which seems plausible, lives may be lost through outright suicide, from seeking refuge in drugs, or from otherwise failing to acquire the skills and self-confidence to deal with life’s challenges.
I walked several blocks to school when I was five years old, and this involved crossing William Street (which was not a busy thoroughfare, but it was still a good idea to look both ways). I paid attention, and in due course I grew up with some sense of responsibility, and some ability to deal with risks and obstacles; I might have done worse if I had not been allowed to walk and cross streets without adult supervision. I did, as I recall, walk to school together with two other first graders from the immediate neighborhood, but I also walked on my own. When I was nine years old, we acquired a beagle, and I took him on walks through the neighborhood; no one thought that this was beyond the capacity of a boy under ten.
I’m glad that there is at least one nine year old out there who has already learned to walk and to cross at least one street on his own, even if his mother is upset about it.
