Join the conversation

As a mother of four recently-launched daughters (and author of a book on the benefits of studying abroad in safe, meaningful ways) I have to completely agree that parents are becoming increasingly more protective and this has a dramatic impact on kids. The paranoid parents set the tone, and those who give their kids more freedom are judged by those who let fear limit their kids' independence.

It's a tough cycle to break because negative news breeds more fear and a down economy stirs up anxiety about what our kids need to be "successful" adults. As a result, freedom to play is becoming more scarce as parents fill their kids' time with activities they feel are likely to give them an edge in some way.

Of course, what our kids really need is enough independence to develop confidence and competence, and an understanding that they can navigate in the world without adult supervision at all times. In addition, our kids need a chance to learn about their own interests and talents without having parents choose what is "best" for them.

When parents learn to let go of their fear (and yes, their ego as well) kids have room to grow into independent and thriving young adults.

This article is relevant to an eye-opening documentary recently aired on PBS stations across the nation.
"Where Do The Children Play" inspired by Elizabeth Goodenough reflects the state of childhood play in today's society.
With the advent of structured activities, concrete jungle-gyms and organized sports, children are missing crucial developmental skills that enable them to cope with the world as productive adults.
On the heels of this viewing I located an article related to this theme of the 'lost childhood',titled-The Importance Of Play written by Alix Spiegel,which I posted in my blog http://www.kindermusikkids.wordpress.com
Kudos to you for recognizing the irony of today's parenting deficiencies-or shall I say efficiencies.
As a mother I woefully recognize my inadequacy in providing too much. The aforementioned article and documentary provide some solid direction to incorporate the 'wildness' our children so desperately need.

My friend and I were talking about how we drive our children around to this and that. We also spent time talking about how we grew up. We walked and rode bikes to wherever we wanted to go. I grew up in a one car family which my father drove to work. In summer, I would get up and leave in the morning not to return until sometimes late at night and never checking in between times. This was the norm in my neighborhood. There were no cell phones and honestly my mother probably didn't want to be bothered. She figured I'd call if there were a problem.
That was suburbia..... wow, how things have changed.

Now, our inner city children live a lifestyle similiar to the one I lived while our suburban children live a in a sheltered bubble. I often find it ironic how academically smart my own children are, yet how street stupid they can be. On the flip side, I teach in the inner city, these children are street brilliant, yet lag in academics.

My good friend adopted two inner city boys who spend quite a bit of time at my home as well. We are all so close that all of the kids consider each other true brothers and sisters. I laugh when they are together, like "Freak the Almighty", they become a set of Super Kids able to handle just about anything put in front of them.

These two boys have grown enormously since first being adopted three years ago. My children have grown enormously as well because of their relationship with the boys. All of their lives are the better just for knowing each other. It's amazing what a little mixing can do.

Maya and Annette (?)--Thank you for your thoughts on the developmental importance of unstructured time. I will confess to some ignorance on this score, but I can see that things have certainly changed in the last 30 years.

Susan--You're right to point out the importance of socio-economic status to all of this. Single parents, teen mothers, parents who live in poverty, parents who work two jobs to make ends meet--all of these parents are much less likely than their more fortunate peers to leave their children no unstructured time. In fact, their children may have far too much unstructured time--and far too little exposure to the enrichment activities adults can offer. Your story of worlds coming together--and of the strengths suburban and urban children have been able to share--is very powerful.

You're starting off with the buuiods assumption that the consumer of the content will always accept and emulate what they see. There has yet to be any serious study to create such a correlation, and most of the people who do act these things out were already sociopaths to begin with. Why, then, should we act on this false premise? Just because you don't see how these extremely violent video games are any less toxic than the abuse of alcohol and tobacco doesn't mean that you can safely assume that they are.There's also the gross impracticality of enforcing such laws. Video games (and, for that matter, most media) are shifting to being distributed digitally. Do you honestly believe that you can somehow force these standards to be applied to a distributor that exists solely online, likely with operations in a different state or time zone? The very idea is absurd and divorced from reality.Then we come to the matter of defining the community part of community standards . By definition, a community has to have some kind of focused commonality, or it does not exist. It is impractical to try to define an entire state as a community, and just as difficult to do so with a moderately sized city. The diversity of opinions and backgrounds all but ensures conflict that drives a community apart rather than unite them in purpose.You also cite exactly zero data as to the consumption of these video games, a classic fear-mongering tactic. Is the percentage of minors affected relatively large or relatively small? What part of these games' audience is minors? Is that the intended audience? Resorting to such low-information arguments only muddies the waters and provides no logical basis on which to build your conclusions.In short, you're tilting at windmills in a way that should be downright embarrassing to an organization that otherwise does good work. You should be ashamed.