Mom jailed for letting 10-year-old walk alone to town

I don’t know what is up with the USA and its obsession that kids cannot have autonomy. I think many of us grew up where our parents didn’t know our location at all times. My parents used to tell me to be home by a certain time, but I used to roam the neighborhood, go get candy at the gas station, explore the forest.

Maybe it is a sign of the eroding social trust in the USA where people do not believe that others in the community are decent people as well. It kind of makes sense if you never actually go out into the community and meet others. The USA lifestyle is you drive everywhere in your big SUV, all interactions are transactional, you don’t talk to your neighbours and instead watch netflix and binge social media where you are sold the idea that everything is horrible and the world is a bad place.

When I was five years old I would walk along a path and take a bridge across a river to visit my friend to play board games. By the time I was nine I was bicycling forty-five minutes to school on a 80 km/h road. The level of paranoia that's infected people around keeping kids near their parents is insane.

> She (the Sheriff) kept mentioning how he could have been run over, or kidnapped or 'anything' could have happened,

This is weird. Is the crime so bad in the town? Even the good-for-nothing cops in my (developing) country do not come up with such nonsense.

https://www.gofundme.com/f/support-parentsusas-fight-for-bri... - "Support ParentsUSA's Fight for Brit's Parental Rights"

When I was 8? I think, I used to take a bus to go get a VHS tape from the local rental shop. It's important for kids to have autonomy. In Japan, its pretty common to send even younger kids out on errands.

A lot of folks talking about the "10-year-old" part but the more pervasive problem in America is the "walking" part. In many areas of America there is zero infrastructure for pedestrians. Anyone walking is viewed as suspicious because surely no sane person would subject themselves to the danger of walking on these streets. Heaven forbid you are young, brown skinned, or wearing unique clothing - then the act of walking is probable cause. Literally.

I was working on a contract job in Houston and stayed at a hotel a mile from their office. First day was a nice morning so I decided to walk. It was ridiculous to navigate 8+ lane wide intersections. It was loud and not exactly a nice walk, but not unsafe and at least it was better than driving. By the time I got to the office, I realized that the security gate only opened for cars - I wasn't able to trip the sensor to even get the com working! A security guard came out to accost me and immediately treated me like a criminal. He couldn't comprehend why I was traveling on foot and refused to release me until my client came down to rescue me. My client's response, shocked in a scolding tone - "WHY did you walk?". I am apparently insane for wanting fresh air and a little morning exercise.

To me at least, a cop arguing that it's not safe to walk around town, is a cop saying they have failed to do their job.

If our towns have actually become so dangerous recently, and that's not what the statistics say, then it seems like there's a whole other discussion we need to have. I don't think the world is more dangerous though, I think the average American has become more isolated and fearful over the past 25 years.

When I was 9 back in 1991, we lived in the Keflavik Navy Station, and my 12 year old sister and I would ride our bikes all over the base. We'd frequently ride to the youth center which was over a mile from our apartment.

The next year, we moved back to Virginia Beach, and I'd frequently ride my bike by myself to the video rental store about 3/4 a mile away.

Are kidnappings really more common now than then? Aren't most kidnappings actually done by close relatives? I knew not to trust strangers.

What really bothers me is how the generation that grew up with the least supervision is now the generation that's calling the cops for children being unsupervised, while also wearing their lack of supervision as a badge of honor.

Sucks. More than the system it's the silly woman who called the cops. Instead of helping the child she did a great disservice to him and his entire family.

I had a similar hiccup when I first came to US when our apt neighbor called cops because my 1 year old was screaming. Crazy, I know.

This country thrives on fear - health, insurance, legal, weapons - the biggest money making industries in US all feed on fear economy.

In a town of 370 people, I'm surprised the driver didn't know the kid, his family for three or four generations, where he lived, and maybe even what he had for breakfast.

Here in Copenhagen, Denmark (I'm American), it is very common for kids at around 8 to start walking or biking to school and we are in a (somewhat) big city. Even taking the metro at 9/10 by themselves is quite common.

I think this part is being underappreciated too:

> It would require her to delegate a "safety person" to be a "knowing participant and guardian" and watch over the children whenever she leaves home.

I was 11 when I started "babysitting" my 9 and 6yo siblings, and 12 when I started babysitting other people's kids. I took a Red Cross training course, got certified, and that was that. Heck, there was a whole series of kids books, The Babysitters Club, about kids who were just 12-13.

Is it no longer normal to leave younger children in the care of older children when parents go out? Even beyond whether a pre-teen should be fine walking to and from town, they need supervision at home whenever mom leaves??

Does anybody else get a feeling that this is fake? Reason is the only source (other news outlets just link to this article), there is no comment from the DA or the sheriff nor any documents or mention of official documentation that could corroborate the story. And the GoFundMe has very little info

I wouldn't sign the safety plan either.

it was roughly a mile into town, a 15-20 minute walk for an 11-year old. we're going into winter but as long as this kid is wearing a coat I wouldn't be too worried.

Imagine being concerned for the well being of a stranger kid, and then a minute later decide to thoroughly destroy his life for the nearest years. Unbelievable.

> It was dinnertime on October 30, 2024

The day before Americans let their kids run around the streets unsupervised, knocking on strangers doors and eating food provided by strangers?

What a strange set of standards.

There's something extremely sick about the modern attitudes to children in the US (and maybe elsewhere). These people are fucking crazy. They can't imagine a world where children actually exist out in the real world and live their life like every other country instead of only in supervised jail schools. Anything approaching affection or concern for other children is seen with suspicion as if its pedophilia. Everyone hates babies or children existing or making noise in public, we don't accomodate parents or children in any way, while watching population growth collapse. Boomers who lament never having grandchildren are called monsters. We are completely losing the fucking plot on the most important responsibility of humanity. There is nothing without children, no future, only immigration which will eventually run dry or extinction. None of these attitudes towards children exist in other places, it doesn't have to be this way.

I heard that 4 or 5 US states have passed laws to broadly protect parents who let their kids range around.

Town of only 370 people only a mile away?

There is no way this sherrif did not know both the kid and the mom at least indirectly, and no way MOST kids in the area don't travel a mile on their own routinely, many every day, and no way this sherriff is not aware of this norm, and this is some personal and/or brown/yellow-people bs.

Maybe or maybe not driven by the sherrif directly but like a neighbor wants the property they live on or something. This has "make someone go away" (for whatever reason) smell. Though they are just as guilty for being willing to perform even if it was someone else's direction.

Like when a business just mysteriously can't get a normal permit in a tiny town where the entire staff of the department is Frank, the brother in law of the guy that owns half the town or the competing business across town, or their personal house near by and they just don't want the view. All impossible to prove and no one to complain to to even try.

I grew up in a comparative metropolis of ZOMG SIX THOUSAND(1) people and kids younger than 11 routinely travelled a hell of a lot further than a single mile by themselves, in the US. This is not crazy or dangerous or abnormal in the slightest in such a setting. In fact it's practically unavoidable in that setting. But Hey we were white and in the north-east version of rural instead of Mexipino-looking in the south-east version of rural.

(I seem to remember a figure more like 10-12k when I was there, but the census figures on wikipedia and say just under 6k for that time frame. Maybe these rural people avoid cooperating with the census, maybe the figure I heard included more of the general area than strictly the borders of the town, maybe I just never heard any such figure since we are talking late 70s and me only 7 to 12.)

This kind of incident is a microcosm of everything that's going wrong in the western world

What’s wild is this is happening in Georgia.

And the police wonder why no one trusts them or there are movements to defund them.

Thankfully, it sounds like the child's mother won't be required to go to prison for a year - as long as she agrees to always have someone physically watch her son, and additionally surveil her son 24/7 using an app installed on their phone.

I wonder how many people these days think that they're going too light on her, and are thirsting for stricter penalties?

There are a few components to this that I can see being frustrating. One is that many people here likely had a more free roam childhood and this kind of behaviour from law enforcement and society in general is quite peculiar and off-putting. Being socially outcast because I let my child walk to the store is one thing. Being actually arrested and threatening to remove the parent of a child in the name of their safety is another.

Another part is the data / justification for this behaviour. From 1999 to 2010 at least, it seems that motor vehicle accidents are the number one cause of teenagers dying. Then it's homicide and suicide. Homicides are mostly committed by people the person knows. I don't have a full complete data set here but ~85% of homicides against youth are committed by family members or people that know the family. Not strangers. It's not to say you should't protect your kids from strangers, just that... walking to the store isn't that.

At 10 the state insists to protect you against being hit by a car on dangerous roads, at 15 it gives you a license so you you can drive one along the very same roads!

Education in Georgia must be excellent if they make responsible driver out of kids not to be left unsupervised in only 5 years.

Ignoring the ridiculous trajectory the world (well mostly the USA) has taken here and just assume it is a necessity to always be able to GPS locate your kids: Kids are smarter than some of the involved parties here seem to think. And they also value their freedom (maybe because the want to do something forbidden, but also just "because"). So, if you force install tracking apps on kids phones, what will happen? They will get creative. Maybe they will just leave their phone at home, maybe they find more involved strategies to fake their location, but they will find ways. Now in a real emergency, they can't call for help. Good job. See also: Simpsons Episode 422 "Lost Verizon" from 2008.

"She kept mentioning how he could have been run over"

Seems like it would be a good idea to catch the people who are running over kids, instead of forcing them to spend their childhood in a virtual prison.

Maybe we should consider changing out National anthem's lyrics from "home of the free" to "home of the safe"? Would rhyme better with "brave", too.

An interesting map: https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/06_02/playgraphicDM1406...

Source: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-462091/How-children...

Absolutely nuts!

Why, when I was a kid we ranged through the city, adjacent forests, rivers, lakes, streams, and over peoples' fences without provocation from anyone except other roving gangs of boys (upon whose detection a dirt-clod battle was likely to ensue). We caught large snakes and brought 'em home as "pets" (always rejected). We were unstoppable in our curiosity about what lay over the next 500 yards.

Aaaaargh! Get offa my lawn!

I only just read the article linked below, before checking HN. The contrast between the two is just jarring. O' what money can buy, freedom in the land of the free, for those with the resources to purchase it.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-11-13/donald-trump-moves-to...

This story is crazy because 10 years old is so old! That’s 5th grade! It’s almost old enough to baby sit small children!

This makes me think of that show from Japan where parents send their 5-year-olds to go grocery shopping on their own.

And reminds me of the many times friends and I rode our bikes 5 miles along the highway to the next town so we could play video games at an arcade. Growing up in the 80’s was very different from now.

Phoning the sheriff first before offering to give the kid a ride? What's wrong with people?

The worse thing about this article is that the child statistically is far more likely to be harmed by law enforcement, than by a passing motorist.

In the land of the freedom

Isn't it equally bad in Canada? That said... stories like these are incomprehensible for the European mind.

https://archive.md/WXM06

Is there a place in the United States where letting your children walk to school on their own is legal?

This is utterly absurd. I really hope the mother sues and wins a lot of money. DFCS is like most government agencies: They will never, and can never, admit when they are wrong because it undermines their authority.

""A few days later, DFCS presented Patterson with a "safety plan" for her to sign. It would require her to delegate a "safety person" to be a "knowing participant and guardian" and watch over the children whenever she leaves home. The plan would also require Patterson to download an app onto her son's phone allowing for his location to be monitored. (The day when it will be illegal not to track one's kids is rapidly approaching.)""

I'm liberal Democrat. But sometimes I think maybe we should just have a beer watch the world burn.

So what we see here are the very real ramifications of a media-driven crime hysteria. The deputy noted that the child could be "kidnapped". You will see claims like "800,000 children are kidnapped every year". The media loves to drum up fear. The vast majority of these cases are custody disputes. Actual cases of children being kidnapped by strangers? Fewer than 100 per year, probably a lot fewer [1].

This is a small rural town. That makes it less likely just because there are fewer strangers. Not that there aren't dangers from known people and family members but that's a risk regardless. It really has nothing to do with walking a mile down a road. This isn't a major road either. The article notes it has a 25mph speed limit.

Compre that to firearm-related deaths, which are in the thousands [2]

One side note for any non-American: you may expect there to be sidewalks on roads. For most roads in the US, this is not the case. There might be a shoulder. There might not. There often won't even be a curb. So you're walking on uneven ground. So you could get hit by a car but this isn't a high speed road.

Common sense should rule here. Like don't the police have better things to do? And the DA? Or DCFS?

[1]: https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/child-abductions-str...

[2]: https://www.kff.org/mental-health/issue-brief/the-impact-of-...

370 people, wtf how the hell it turned out like this

Soft. I was 10+ miles away from home on a bike when I was 8.

The fundamental dynamic underlying all of this is that there are absolutely zero downsides or repercussions for the professional bureaucrats persecuting their victims in this way. At the very least, the civil damages of legal expenses, emotional pain and suffering for the mother plus her four kids, physical harm from being held in poor jails, straight up wasted time, etc should be coming out of the budgets of the organizations perpetrating these attacks. Instead, in the worst case they simply get told "no" after a long arduous battle on the part of the parents (that the bureaucrats even get paid to engage in!), and are free to try again. This creates absolutely zero incentive to exercise judgement whether to actually persecute individual cases. Essentially, sovereign immunity being applied to every penny-ante government employee strikes again.

That prosecutor should be disbarred.

> A few days later, DFCS presented Patterson with a "safety plan" for her to sign. It would require her to delegate a "safety person" to be a "knowing participant and guardian" and watch over the children whenever she leaves home. The plan would also require Patterson to download an app onto her son's phone allowing for his location to be monitored.

Monitored by whom? This is insane.

Good old USA of course. There was another body cam footage of an eldery woman who was arrested for merely walking along the road.

I don't blame anyone in the story, this is yet another symptom of the US sprawl, car centric culture, and capitalism that leaves people desperate without any safety net.

Take care of people's basic needs and you might see crime drop.

IANAL but this stuff interests me -- looks like Mom was charged with 16-5-60(b) [1]

"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."

So either this little half-horse town is a serious stepford hellscape, or Mom eats a grand or two (yay for the GoFundMe) to get a competent lawyer to brush this nonsense away. If they succeed in pressing this case that Mom endangered her child, then I hope the reaction is the installation of guardrails and sidewalks all over that town, such that its budget simply implodes.

Just ridiculous. The whole apparatus at work here makes me sad, and there are layers of impersonal failure and risk aversion at work here. It's very cold, and frankly, the kids watching mom get cuffed in their home means any purported damage we're trying to shield the kids from -- is already done.

The government here needs the adult supervision, not the 10 year old.

[1] https://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/title-16/chapter-5/arti...

I was traveling by local buses in the first grade in an Indian city of 25M people. Today my (well off) siblings in NY won't let their kids out of their sight for even 1 second.

America wonders how they produce these safe space snowflakes and this is absolutely the attitude that causes it.

"Why aren't people having kids?"

in the woke hellscape of NYC you will see ten year olds riding the subway home from school all the time (the MTA explicitly recommends age 8 as the cutoff age for riding alone, although 12 is the more in-practice age).

> 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.

Yeah, but which road was this?

From Street View for Mineral Bluff, Ga:

1. Murphy Highway-- no sidewalks, a lot of parts with no shoulder whatsoever, no protection for a walker even on parts with small shoulder

2. Mineral Bluff Highway-- somehow even less shoulder than Murphy Highway. I see a guardrail that would force a pedestrian to walk about a foot away from traffic

3. Railroad Road-- I'd guessing this road has lower volume traffic. But it's still extremely hostile to pedestrians-- only shoulder is either deep grass or a large ditch that's unwalkable. So the kid would have been forced to walk directly in the road for most of this

#1 and #2, woman absolutely did the right thing calling police.

#3? If low volume, meh. Still dangerous, though.

The Venn diagram of people who think it's ok to treat parents like this and people who vote "for liberty" is a circle.

my mom was taken into "adult protection custody" , for jwalking, this is happening now, and she is held in the hospital in bridgewater ns, on.the locked ward and has now had her cell phone taken for obsessivly calling and trying to be released she does have alzhiemrs but canadas constituion specifies that people are allowed to take there own risks

held incomunicado for her own saftey I got banned from the hospital grounds for "acting up", no threats or foul language

the only reason trump got voted in, is because you have to bring your own pen to write in putin and nobody thought of that in time