lol yeah traumatize her family by showing up unannounced to take their mother away, while also undermining their mother’s authority as a parent. Just another day in the line of duty.
When I was 12 or 13 I’d walk into town to check out the used cd stores all the time. Seems pretty normal.
As a middle aged father of two grown boys, one of the things I wish I had done better was encourage them to go out on their own more. Their mother would always be so worried, and knowing she has the best intention for them I would give in.
Also there was a couple of years when they were young I would try to force them to go outside and play, but they would quickly become bored and come back in the house. This was so frustrating at the time and then I realized that there were no other kids playing outside either. When I was growing up in the 80s and early 90s, I practically lived outside with my friends.
My boys are significantly more dependent on us, much less capable and their development seems stunted or slowed, which I am sure is partly due to the pandemic, but also due to the sheltering that has become normalized in our culture. Allowing this to happen is one of my biggest regrets as a father, which all things considered I guess isn’t that bad while keeping things in perspective.
I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that the abundance of information has a side effect of over protectiveness. This makes some sense as it would be evolutionarily beneficial to protect against potential threats, however media is tricking our brains to believe that these threats are both abundant and persistent.
Children need unsupervised freedom as part of their development, it allows them to learn how to navigate the world in a healthy regulated way, and how to deal with challenges, like problem solving or social interaction. The perception that the world is a dangerous place that children need constant protection from is flawed. If that were true, we would have never have survived as a species.
If anything they’ll spend all their time online unsupervised which might be much more dangerous
I was like 3 towns away when I was 10. At this rate we will raise adults that can’t think for/do anything themselves. Let the kids live.
Land of the free.
Lol, back when I was a kid, getting grounded was a punishment. Not a legally binding rule parents must enforce at home at all times. Lol, America is fucked.
Reason.com is a libertarian propaganda mill. This story is meant to pit you against the state so you can swallow their other bullshit.
So you think this woman deserved to be arrested?
What I am wondering is what this publication is leaving out of the story in order to sell their perspective on everything. Maybe it’s nothing and this really is just a DCFS gone mad (there are certainly cases in which this is true), or maybe there’s more to the story and they are just glazing over it to make things sound better to their point of view.
Either way, this is a Republican run state which is the party that likes to court libertarians so I am pretty skeptical of everything regarding this.
I’ve heard this story before, it’s not a new incident. It’s also getting a lot of coverage from lots of media.
Similar story, 2014: https://www.cnn.com/2014/07/31/living/florida-mom-arrested-son-park/index.html
Republican run state which is the party that likes to court libertarians
Hasn’t the last 20 years or so proven their actions very differently from their claims?
This is why you check the story against multiple sources. Just search “brittany patterson georgia” and you will find this has gone viral and there is tons of outrage over this.
I haven’t found a story that doesn’t use Reason as their source. I only found one that tried to contact the police department for comment, but they hadn’t responded.
So we do still only have one truly distinct account of this story, which is the mom’s side of the ordeal.
Virality and outrage don’t make a story more accurate.
We don’t know why the woman who encountered the boy on the road called the police. We don’t know what the kid was doing at the time. Was he walking to the side of the road? Was he walking on the road? Did he seem “off” in some way that made it so that the woman called the police? Were there previous warnings that that road was dangerous?
Police set up a safety plan for the son, that involved making sure someone always knew where he was. Why was that done? Multiple people in the PD all looked at the case and decided this was the right course of action, why?
I’ll judge once I hear what the police says their motivations were. They could have well stepped over the line here. Or there were legitimate concerns for the child’s safety.
Does that make the actual story any less disturbing?
The question is what they’re leaving out of the story. Maybe this is a full accounting and law enforcement needs to chill the fuck out. Maybe it’s not the whole story and law enforcement are doing their job correctly. Maybe it’s still an overreaction, but more justifiable. In any case, there is no reason to take Reason at their word.
Free country where a 10 year old kid can’t even walk alone. Meanwhile in Germany parents of 6 year olds are heavily encouraged by school to let kids walk to school alone and stop being such a cry babies because nothing is gonna happen and they should learn to be independent.
Also why did they arrest her? In my country when the state thinks you committed a smaller crime and there’s no reason to believe you’re gonna fly they just send you a letter.
why did they arrest her?
It’s Georgia
At 10 I was riding my bike into town, 2.5mi, on roads with limits as high as 50mph.
Sometimes I’d ride my bike in on a Sunday, get a lift home, skip the bus from school, walk to my friend’s house, play Nintendo for an hour, and ride my bike home. I’d get there the same time the bus would drop me off and I got to play Nintendo for an hour.
your kid goes for a walk? believe it or not, straight to jail.
This is what 24/7 news does to the brain. It completely fucks up people’s sense of how risky things are.
As humans we tend to assume that the probability of something happening is proportional to the number of times we can remember hearing of it happening.
Many people think children walking or playing alone are at high risk of getting abducted because they hear about it “all the time” on the news. Yet they don’t think twice about sticking their kids in the car and driving somewhere.
Statistically though you’re orders of magnitude more likely to kill your child in a car accident, than have them abducted by a random stranger while allowing them to play or walk somewhere unattended. Car accidents are common so they rarely make the news, Child Abductions are extremely rare And frequently make the news. The mom in the story could have literally driven the child to the town and put the child at a greater risk in doing so then letting the child walk there alone.
Both the cop in the story, and the Karen that called him, Have a completely distorted sense of how much risk this child was in, And it’s all because the news media makes us think the extremely rare is relatively common.
In recent years, the media has told stories in fear mongering ways in order to drive more ratings, Which is only the amplifying this effect.
Not disagreeing with you. Just making clear that it is actually worse.
A Karen and a cop can’t put someone in jail. It takes a prosecutor, a judge and a jury of her peers.
A Karen and a cop can’t put someone in jail. It takes a prosecutor, a judge and a jury of her peers.
This is not factual. A cop can bring anyone into jail that they have just about any made up reason to.
It takes all those extra individual to put you in prison.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/jail-vs-prison-difference
I’m no expert, but I think you’re mixing up jail and prison. Prison would require a judge, jury and trial. But a cop can unilaterally throw someone in jail temporarily until their first court appearance.
From the article:
They [the sherif and a deputy] told Patterson to turn around and put her hands behind her back. As three of her kids watched, Patterson was handcuffed. The sheriff took her purse and phone, put her in the cruiser, and hauled her off to jail.
A woman who saw him walking alongside the road—speed limit: 25 in some places, 35 in others—asked him if he was OK. He said yes.
Nevertheless, she called the police.
So it was all that Karen’s fault…
A family friend got a police visit because she lets her kids ride their bikes out of view of home. Like they go a couple streets over and ride around but apparently that’s neglect now
I grew up on the southeast side of Portland. When I was 10, I rode my bike to Multnomah Falls and across the river into Washington State. I moved away just before my 11th birthday so I’m very confident about my age. I also rode all around Portland. Into downtown, down to Lake Oswego, over to my aunt’s in Gresham…
The worst thing that ever happened was an older kid on a bike came up next to me and tried to push me off of my bike, but it didn’t work and I took off and he was chasing me. I wove thru traffic and parked cars at a shopping center and he ended up slamming into a parked car at full speed. :)
Fair, but the parent still neglected the child.
In what way?
Help me understand what your definition of neglect is.
Abandonment is neglect.
That’s not what neglect is
Sure.
It’s not
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
No. It was liberal busybodies who enabled this sort of thing to happen in the first place.
And if that statement pisses anyone off, ask yourself this: Do you think this sort of thing was championed by conservative people?
I’m liberal as hell in most opinions, but this is exactly the sort of government overreach conservatives despise.
This sort of nanny state neighbor hood busy body bullshit is constantly perpetuated by elderly conservatives with too much time on their hands.
Liberals arent the fucking snowflakes conservatives claim they are, but conservatives sure act like one.
The government stopping doctors from practicing medicine is overreach every “conservative” votes for. Stopping a person from growing a plant and then consuming it is government overreach that every “conservative” votes for. Unconstitutional seizure of money without a fair trial is government overreach that every “conservative” votes for. Forcing
shariachristian indoctrination into school curriculums is government overreach that every “conservative” votes for.Conservatives hate government overreach
Unless someone is gay
Then the government should reach all around to prevent them participating in public life.
Yes I do think it was championed by conservative people. And if that statement pisses anyone off, my evidence is that Fannin County GA, where this took place, voted 82% for Trump. It’s almost as if the whole “government overreach” thing is just empty marketing for policies that make rich people richer…
Nah, this isn’t a political thing, it’s an asshole thing
I’d imagine that the odds of that person being conservative in a town of 300 people are like 99%.
I still see children walking alone where I live, but I’ll admit that I can’t compare it to when I was young because I don’t pass by elementary schools before/after school to be able to see them.
I could definitely see it championed by some conservative people. Both ends of the political spectrum can have tendencies towards government control, depending on the topic.
Conservatism is often built upon fear. Also consider all of the studies linking right-wing political views to physiological differences like bigger amygdalas (which play a role in fear).
Some people will be fearful that children need to be protected at all costs, so they’ll do things like this.
Just remember which side is doing things “for the children” as a scapegoat…hide the gays for the children, no drag story time to protect the children, no sex education (even books) to keep the children innocent. No walking alone outside to protect the children.
I’m not saying this particular Karen was Conservative, but I’m saying that she could be. I’m not sure why you’re blaming Liberal people, but I’m sure you have explanations like I do (and I’d be curious to hear them), but I’d wager that the problem is not exclusively tied to either side of the political spectrum.
These days “conservatives” despise anything that has a hint of government smell on it. Not because of anything meaningful or anything, of course, just that “government bad”.
Do they? Cuz I just read an article about Donald Trump starting a whole new government agency.
Yeah, but to them he’s the “anti-government”.
It flies in the face of rationality, of course, but so does most conservative ideology.
I was waiting for the part of the article where something tragic happened to the kid to warrant the mom’s jailing.
Not… him just going for a completely normal walk…
What the fuck.
While I’m a big parental rights fan I actually tentatively am siding with the state on this one.
Patterson had driven her eldest son to a medical appointment. Her youngest son, 11-year-old Soren, intended to come along but wasn’t around when it was time to leave.
It’s one thing to intentionally raise your child in a free-range way, I think that should be allowed to a certain degree. It’s a completely different thing to neglect your child by driving away from your home after you can’t find him at the house and you don’t know where he is.
Let me know when you have kids also reflect on how you grew up. We would ride our bikes like miles and also explore the creek and surrounding areas as kids in Ohio. I hope to raise my child in a similar way when she is old enough to explore the area where I live now….
I actually get where you’re coming from here regarding not knowing where the kid is and then leaving to go somewhere else. I am a parent of a 10 year old.
I disagree with the state getting involved at all beyond giving the kid a ride to the appointment or back home and talking to the mom with a warning.
The kid should’ve just stayed home and waited instead of going off on his own to where they were because they might’ve gotten done and gone home and missed each other.
Edit: And read the story in full. Less than a mile away? Oof, yeah, that’s nothing. My kid rides his bike or walks around our neighborhood, a suburb of Chicago, and has gone that far or further without my wife and I worrying.
Lmao. Less than 1 mile? I walked twice that every day to school since I was 7
When I had my small children this summer they were freaking out that it was a 1.2 mile hike to the creek. FFS, we started elementary gym class with a mile run, every, single day.
Don’t know where I’m going with this. Must be an old man, “Everyone’s a pussy now days”.
Yeah, it’s the distance that makes this. I walked a mile to elementary school and back since I was six.
Same(ish). Half mile walk to and from school every morning. I was in kindergarten. I was escorted a few times to teach me the route. By 5th grade I was occasionally riding bike or walking 3 miles across town.
Yo I might not be old enough to say this but it was like 5 miles for me who lived out in the country and uphill both fucking ways!
This is a serious affront to freedom.
My parents brag about how they had no car seats and THEY survived. So I guess I should have listened to my dad’s impatience and not put it in the car before going somewhere with our newborn?
Cars are demonstrably far more dangerous
Yes but it’s not like your parents had no idea where you were and took no action to find you. This is textbook neglect, not intentional parenting.
From school close to when the street lights came on my parents had zero idea where I was.
I was usually within 20km of home on my bike. Usually.
You’re really stretching this.
11 year old pre-teen? He’s not a baby that requires constant supervision
I remember biking all over as a kid. I didn’t tell my parents where I was going. Might head off into the bluffs or to the shopping center or to a friend’s house or to a convenience store or along some bike trails. I sure went further than a mile.
And we didn’t have cell phones or whatever back then either.
I don’t feel that I was neglected.
It is not. Why would you need to track your almost-teen 24/7? It wouldn’t be child neglect even if the kid was 6. They’re more than old enough to go on spontaneous exploring.
Trump voter believes in small government. Also that the state should be able to legally compel you to electronically track your children and that 11-year-olds shouldn’t be able to walk around outside without constant surveillance and sides with parents being arrested for allowing it. Believes “some” parental freedom should be “allowed.”
I just rolled my eyes so hard I gave myself a headache.
You think this sort of government abuse is championed by conservatives?! How the fuck do you conclude that?!
Because it happened in the state of Georgia, the state building a literal Police City?
Because the person who said those things and to whom I’m responding is the “Trump voter” I specifically referenced? In case the fact that I’m directly responding to their comment and they’re the OP of this post didn’t make it clear enough for you.
Who gives half a shit that a ten year old is alone in their own home?!
Not me 🤷🏾♂️
If a kid is old enough to go to school its old enough to walk to places or stay home alone
Three year olds go to school…
Edit: Getting down voted when I have a 3 year old of my own who goes to school every day for the full day.
First grade starts at 6 in North America, 5 if your born late in the year, kindergarten and pre k might get you as early as 4, but this kid was 10 that 5th and 4th grade, my parents wanted me out and about as much as possible at that age, just being home at dark and for dinner.
I too live in North America, and my currently 3 year old goes to kindergarten every day for the full day.
I don’t know if I’m instantly ready to side with the state, but none of the signs are there to think this is some intentional abuse of power. She’s a white realtor in a bright red rural county. Unless the cop was some sitcom import straight from “The People’s Gaypublic of California” I have to think they saw something that hit them wrong to drill down through the various layers of privilege. I admit I have a sort of reflexive concern about reason.com as a source, as well. Sometimes it’s sensible, but often it’s just a wankfest for so-called libertarians who have read Ayn Rand and a couple of Austrian-school economics articles.
For Brittany here, I would want to know what she actually told the cop, what her older son said in his interview, what the state of the road is (possibly no sidewalks?), and just generally if there’s a pattern of neglect. They haven’t even decided if they’ll press charges yet, while they play chicken over the signature thing. If they do, here’s the statute:
A person who causes bodily harm to or endangers the bodily safety of another person by consciously disregarding a substantial and unjustifiable risk that his or her act or omission will cause harm or endanger the safety of the other person and the disregard constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care which a reasonable person would exercise in the situation is guilty of a misdemeanor.
I grew up in the 90s.
When we got to 2nd grade, we became eligible to take a road-sign test. (Left, right, stop). If you could demonstrate that you knew what that meant, and show them you owned a helmet, you could then ride your bicycle to and from school.
I was 7.
This was more than a decade after the term “stranger danger” had been seared into the American psyche.
I worry of the future.
People think kids can do less and less. I was ten when I was allowed out in a rowboat by myself on the lake my grandparents had a cottage on in the 90’s. Walk a mile? We went all fucking over. I don’t get it. Shit the rule at school was if you lived within half a mile you walked to school.
Shit, my bus stop was at least a half mile away without so much as a sidewalk anywhere, just a dirt road and a canal. You didn’t even get a bus stop if you were less than 2 miles from school. We regularly rode our bikes like 12 miles away from home to the movie theater, I think we were pre-teens. Technically I could have ridden my bike to grade 6 (it was on the way to the movie theater), but who wants to show up to 6th grade everyday drenched in sweat or rain (it would always have been one or the other).
In my school in Sweden the blanket rule was that once you were ten you got to bike to school.
Now this was in the suburbs north of Stockholm and the streets were calm, but we did have to pass a rail crossing.
I remember the day before school school was starting, my mom walked me and my sister to school to show the way we should walk to school, and then we walked to and from school unsupervised from when I was six.
Why aren’t the kids going outside anymore lol
OMFG I KNOW RIGHT!?! XD
