What Do You Think Is A Suitable Age For Children to Go Out On Their Own?

I was reading through some of the topics in the town I live in's forum, and I found this topic and wanted to know your views on it, as people that may or may not be affected by it. (also I need to have some good points to use against my mom. xD)

I personally think that the age kids should be allowed out on their own should be whether or not the parent trusts them. If they're a respectable person, get good grades and have decent friends, I'd let them out on their own. If they're, I daresay, trashy, (ex. the stereotypical 13 year old girl) or a troublemaker, hold them in. God knows what they'd do without supervision. D:

 

Hmm.. I'd say the age kids should be allowed out without supervision should be 10? I was allowed out on my own at a younger age than this, but I live in a little town where nothing ever really happens.

I'd say it also depends on the area where you live. Places around America like NY (namely Manhattan) that are super busy- They shouldn't go without supervision there til at least teens I'd say. I was mindboggled walking around there WITH people, so I daresay what it'd be like for kids with or without friends there D:

I can't really be certain, though. Just yesterday it was on the radio that a 6 and 7 year old were out after dark, crossing a freaking motorway with their pushbikes. They were hit by 3 cars and killed instantly. WHAT.THE.HELL? Why would you even let them out your site? It's so sad, and it's a tragedy. The parents are wholly to blame.

I also kinda agree with what their attitude is. If they're loutish, careless, naive, etc, they shouldn't be allowed out until they get a grip. If a parent knows they can trust their child, then fine. They'll have to go by their own judgement. :\

 

Old enough to defend yourself from kidnapping, walking across the road when a vehicle is driving through, and refuse drugs or join a gang. It depends on the kind of place the child lives in. If it's a place where not much happens and no kidnappings, accidents and gangs have been reported, even 5-year olds should be allowed to go out on their own. Where I grew up in, all the kids 5 and up could go out on their own and hang out with other kids, but not out to the commercialized areas or near highways.

 

Like Lithy said, it really depends where you live, and what you said Misty about the person's personality.
I know way some parents who don't give a damn about what their kids do, and let them out at the age of 10 and don't say a word if they come back at 2am. 3 years later, those kids smoke and drink. Yup, at the age of 13.

Other parents do care about what their kids do, and give these kids limits. A 16 year old person I know have these kind of parents. They don't let her out too long. And they call her every few hours. Yet the girl smokes, drinks and takes drugs. She's a careless person, who doesn't give a damn what she does to herself. (That's a bit different topic though)

While a person at my old school has parents who wouldn't trust him till the age of 16. And that person is perfectly fine. And has a great personality (By great I mean he doesn't do the things other people are 'influenced' to do). He's not a careless person.

So it all depends in location and personality.

Anyway IMO, 12-13 years old is the appropriate age to trust children to go out on their own.

 

It really depends on the child's maturity and where they live. But if I really have to give a number, I'd say at least 9. Most 9 year olds I see nowadays look like they know how to keep it real, so I guess they could handle a trip to the depanneur or something like that without running into trouble.

 

lol, I think you need to give kids more credit.. are you guys saying they should have parental supervision whenever they go out up until they're teenagers?? o.o

I was out and about as soon as I could walk.. Though my neighbourhood was super sleepy and within most households, there was a couple of kids.

And it also depends on how far away they're allowed to go. 100 metre radius, yes; motorway, nooo.

 

I say 16 at least then they hopefully know better...

 

I think it depends on the childs behavior and personalty. If the are a horrible kid, make them work for it. If the are a good kid let them free. Adults these days think kids are these destuctive little demons but were not. And plus I think if were in a public place and get kidnapped we can scream or if were with a group of friends were not going to get raped.

 

To me, unless I know my child is responsible and won't go off with strangers or do something dumb, I'll let them out. Really, my age would probably be 14? Yeah, but, gosh, there seems to be like child rapists everywhere - even in small towns. Just because nothing barely happens doesn't mean nothing's going to happen. Most of these rape and murders are the parent's fault of not protecting their kid. Not smoothering protection but enough protection so that they don't get snatched off the streets.

I'm twelve, and I've never gone out without a parent. Why? Because I don't want to be the next child rape victim. I want to live a happy productive life, not one filled with violence. I want the same for my kids as well. I live in Orange County, and a couple of incidents involving these situations have happened, and I've watched enough Cold Case Files to know the consequences.

 

Oh, yes, I walked from my high school to home which is approximately 2 miles away and one of the reasons why I do that is to figure out whether or not it is really safe out in the streets and whether or not I could defend myself if someone attacked me and in the 3 times that I have done so, no one seemed to mind. I think people have a new viewpoint on kids and the consequences of doing bad deeds so they don't even think about doing bad things to kids. -- also, the fact that there are better things to do in this world adds to that reason.

 

As others have said, I think it depends on two things mainly. Your environment and your kid.

The environment you live in is important. Even if the kid is brilliant and listens to all mommy and daddy say, if the area you live in has kids that are kidnapped, dragged into gangs, beaten up by bullies etc and you can't get out of it, I'd be a helluva lot less likely to want my kid running around out there on his/her lonesome. This does not mean I would not try to get to know parents of the area and help the kid meet kids from school etc. It just means I'd try to ensure the kid has some kind of supervision. If I live in an area that is more peaceful, good neighbors and people around and all, then it is easier to let the kid out on his/her own more. However, I'd still make sure that the kid -told me- where he/she was going. Emergencies happen and even if the kid can go out, they should always tell a parent where they are. I did it and though at times I felt the rule was dumb, it was worth it.

Now for the kid part. I don't believe there is a set age I could even begin to place on a kid for this sort of thing. Kids are different. You see some really mature ones for their age and then you see the ones that are acting like they are 5 when they are 14. Of course, part of the maturity depends on the parents being informative and not just saying 'don't do this because I said so!'. Kids don't listen to that junk. Adults don't. We expect reasons why that make sense. If the kid is mature and I feel they can be trusted, I'd do it on an issue of test. First, I'd let the child play with others nearby so I can see how he/she does. As time goes on, I'd extend their limits of boundaries they cannot cross and after that, as long as there is keen communication, that could be extended further until I don't worry about it.

The biggest point though I would have to say is that regardless of how old the kids are, I think it only right they give a call to say if they are leaving an area and going to another because it's not just a matter of trust in the kids that's the problem. It's a matter of safety overall, and what -if- the worst happened? It will look awfully stupid to the police for the adult to say 'uh, I don't know where the kid went to.' It doesn't matter what age the kid is. A parent should have some knowledge as to where they are, and I feel that the kids are owed that same right when the parents leave. Sometimes, after all, adults get kidnapped too or run into troubles.

 

It doesn't matter really, cause since we are not legally adults until we turn 18 we have to have a legal guardian living with us or something to that extent. Plus to go out on our own at a young age just plain and simple is stupid, no 15 year old can go to school, hold a job, and pay utilities. It just doesn't work that way its to expensive and they would put themselves in a large financial risk zone. And anyways to move out on your own you need to have established credit and such which being once again under 18 is impossible to do. And either way I would like the idea, mostly cause alot of stuff happens when you move out, things you don't expect to happen. Just all in all its not good for a kid to being doing something like that.

 

It's the childs decision. Since I am not a parent, I can't say for sure how I'd react to my child wanting to go out on his/her own. o_o

But... at the very latest, I would say 18, no matter what. Though, if they had a job and wanted to continue living with me, then they could pay like 25 bucks a month for rent or something. Something simple like that. Or perhaps a % of their monthly income.

Who knows.

 

I'd also say 13 ... =P
well if you live in a city with bad*** people i guess you cant do it that early
also if the child isn't responsible enough to manage to come home early enough or so you'll have to say no =/

 

As several people have said, I think it depends on each individual child :3

I myself was allowed out on my own when I was about 7 ^^ but there are other children who should be kept on a leash until they are at least 40 <_>

If a child is mature and responsible enough to be out alone then I see no problem with them going out.

I also agree that it depends on the area that the children live in, obviously in a high crime/risk area I would expect the children to be older before being allowed out alone.

I think this is one of those questions that you cannot give a direct answer too.​

 

I admit type of child and enviroment are importnt, I would still not send them out.

I mean I guess if I have a child (and the chance is growing thiner XD) from my own experiences ni my type of area and people I have met, I would never let them out of the house, the street life these days is filled with violence, I myself fear leaving my house each day, because I'll get threatened by some punk idiots with knives they've stolen, and guns they've bought, just for a camera phone? I am not going to die over a phone!

SO I guess an age to leave by themselves is something I am worried about, when I move out of my area and into some better place, and learn the area better I guess i'll decide then but for now, never by themselves.

 

12 or 13 and that's if the parent trusts the child. And Catch The Rain, age 7? I'm surprised you weren't abducted.

 

i think if the child is mature enough and independent, 20 would be suit them to go out on their own, but nowadays it will be dangerous for parents to send their child out..