It's Not a Crime to Trust Your Kids

SIGN UP FOR THE DAILY JWR UPDATE. IT'S FREE. (AND NO SPAM!) Just click here.

You may have read the story of Karyann Parkinson, the Williamsburg, Virginia, mom who let her son walk half a mile in their gated community to gather goose feathers.

Sam, 5, was fine. He and Karyann had been out earlier that same day, and he wanted to go back where they'd just been, passing a pond on the way. Eight months pregnant with child No. 5, she told Sam, "Sure, go have fun while I make lunch."

But someone called security when they saw the boy alone. A guard came to pick him up and said, "Get in the vehicle. I'll drive you home." So well trained was Sam that he refused. No getting in a car with a stranger!

So the guard walked him home and told Karyann he wasn't allowed to walk around unattended. Karyann, who'd just finished law school, said she knew this was not against the homeowner association rules.

The ruffled guard said, "Well, it's against the LAW," and summoned the cops. The cops came, and they called child protective services. Long story short, Karyann was found guilty of "contributing to the delinquency of a minor" and sentenced to six months in jail — suspended if she comports with the desires of child protective services, which placed her on their child abuse and neglect registry.

I summarize all this because of what came next, which was an interview with Karyann and me on the NPR show "On Point with Meghna Chakrabarti." Karyann explained that she knew her son could handle this little walk.

For my part, I said we've forgotten how much kids can do on their own, even at young ages. (I walked to school myself at Sam's age, and no one arrested my mom.)

And while the authorities might be raising their own kids differently — everyone does —that doesn't make Karyann guilty of neglect. Neglect is only when you put your kid in obvious, serious, likely danger.

But then — and here's my big point — host Chakrabarti turned to the final guest, a pediatrician and "injury prevention advocate."

First, let me state that I like injury prevention too! But to the safety expert, this scenario looked very different than it did to Karyann and me.

The expert said sure, Sam was fine. But what if on his walk he saw a duck in the pond? So cute! But wait — the duck got its foot caught in a net! The duck is in DISTRESS! Sam, bless his heart, wants to SAVE THE DUCK! He runs into the pond and drowns. Mom rues the day forever. The end.

I was stunned by the ease with which the safety expert took an everyday experience — a little neighborhood walk — and turned it into not just a bad experience but the absolute WORST: A child is DEAD, and it's ALL HIS MOTHER'S FAULT.

I call this "worst-first thinking" — thinking up the WORST case FIRST and proceeding as if it's likely to happen.

It can feel prudent ... until you examine it a bit. After all, the least likely, most horrific thing could happen in ANY situation. A child could choke to death on a sandwich, or trip on the dog and suffer a fatal concussion. Mom could be driving him to the dentist and they get totaled by a drunk driver.

We don't catastrophize like that about everyday activities EXCEPT when we let our kids out of our sight. And that catastrophizing is so valorized that we punish the moms — like Karyann — who DON'T do it.

Worst-first thinking feels prudent. It feels innate. But it is NEW. Our parents didn't imagine the worst-case scenario every time we walked to the store or park, or passed by a pond.

Now that we do, it is turning rational, loving parents into criminals, and kids into prisoners under house arrest. They're stuck on the couch, scrolling, snacking, anxious.

How is that making anyone better off?