• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Kids on leashes

Nope no kids, but I've been around plenty of parents and heard enough stories that I don't think I'm quite disqualified form the conversation :D. You both have your kids and were able to raise them well and all that without a leash, or whatever else you deem unnecessary, right? That's great but suppose, for the sake of argument, that you were to raise an infinite number of kids. Who's to say that you'd be able to adapt well enough to any of them to train them effectively without a leash?

Thats not a very good argument, Kwes, as there are alternatives to using a leash that can be employed to every child. Therefore the use of the leash never has to be an option, if one chooses not to use it.
 
Thats not a very good argument, Kwes, as there are alternatives to using a leash that can be employed to every child. Therefore the use of the leash never has to be an option, if one chooses not to use it.

It also doesn't mean that if one chooses to use it, it's indicative of a parenting-skills deficit.

I'd THINK it looks silly but I would not automatically assume that that person is a crappy parent for doing so. Would you?

Kids who ride bikes and do not get injured are NOT lucky, they are well-trained and do not need helmets.
 
I've used numerous OTHER forms of restraint on my children to prevent injury after they were able to walk - including slings, strollers, backpacks, handholding, shirtholding, beltloop holding, and just plain old generic holding 'em in my arms.

I was always a fan of overalls for my daughters when they were young (3 and under). The back panel is essentially a built-in handle that is perfect for quick restraint.
 
Here's an idea: Why not simply not bring your kids into places where one step = death until they're mature enough to know that?

When I was 2, my parents didn't take me into minefields, or mountain climbing, or sea kayaking, or HALO jumping. They took me to kid-friendly amusement parks, playgrounds, nice safe parks for car-camping trips, etc.

When I was old enough, they put me in swimming and canoeing lessons. Once I had learned those skills, we started going canoeing as a family.


Also, they taught me at an early age to not get lost, or, if I did, how to get found; or, if I couldn't, how to find my way home. It was only after I'd mastered those skills that they started to take me downtown, into malls, etc.

I guess I'm siding with the crowd that says that, under ordinary circumstances and with non-disabled children, a leash is a substitute for poor parenting. Does not being able to bring your kid with you everywhere represent sacrifices and challenges in that your lifestyle needs to change to accomodate, and that you may need to find somebody to take care of your tyke and change up your schedule to match? Yes, totally.

But, last time I checked, having kids was SUPPOSED to change your life.
 
Here's an idea: Why not simply not bring your kids into places where one step = death until they're mature enough to know that?

Because in general it's impossible to operate in life like that.

It would mean not bringing my kids:

1) Into my front yard
2) To the grocery store
3) To my mailbox
4) To most restaurants in which I eat

etc.



When I was 2, my parents didn't take me into minefields, or mountain climbing, or sea kayaking, or HALO jumping. They took me to kid-friendly amusement parks, playgrounds, nice safe parks for car-camping trips, etc.

Did they take you across any busy streets while using SOME manner of restraint on you?



Also, they taught me at an early age to not get lost, or, if I did, how to get found; or, if I couldn't, how to find my way home. It was only after I'd mastered those skills that they started to take me downtown, into malls, etc.

That just isn't an option for many folks. There have been many times since I had kids where not taking the kids shopping meant no groceries.

I guess I'm siding with the crowd that says that, under ordinary circumstances and with non-disabled children, a leash is a substitute for poor parenting. Does not being able to bring your kid with you everywhere represent sacrifices and challenges in that your lifestyle needs to change to accomodate, and that you may need to find somebody to take care of your tyke and change up your schedule to match? Yes, totally.

But, last time I checked, having kids was SUPPOSED to change your life.

So ALL forms of restraining your child for their safety are a substitute for proper parenting?

Or just a leash?

What is the difference between the various forms of restraint regularly used by parents (slings, strollers, backpacks, etc) and leashes?

Are parents who strap their child into the cart at the grocery store an example of appropriately "changing up their schedule" but parents who use a leash on the same age child at the same grocery store are not?
 
I would assume that a parent that made a kid( who was mentally an physically healthy ) wear a helmet had poor decision making skills or had a mental disorder.

yeah but how would you know that the kid was mentally and physically healthy at a glance? You can automatically tell that there's nothing more going on then EXACTLY what you're seeing at the moment and judge the parent as "bad" in a nanosecond?
I couldn't.
 
I was always a fan of overalls for my daughters when they were young (3 and under). The back panel is essentially a built-in handle that is perfect for quick restraint.

Yup. I used them the other way around, too. If my kids didn't get up and go on request I'd grab by the back and carry them like suit cases. Very handy until they were too heavy.

Even possibly saved my daughters life when she didn't get on to a ski lift that was running. We were at 20' height and she was hanging from my hand below the seat before I managed to pull her up to safety. Scary seconds!
 
Ah, Borgman, I've missed butting heads with you! ;)

With all due respect, my own personal opinion - and I don't mind if you or anybody else differs, that's what makes our two countries great - is that if your front yard is a potentially lethal space for a young child, or your favourite restaurant, then you have failed/are failing in your responsibility to your child to provide a safe environment in which to grow up.

(Feel free to be offended, but please understand I don't mean any offence, nor think any less of you or anybody; I fail to live up to most of the standards I impose on myself too, so it's not like I'm judging by saying that.)

"Did they take you across any busy streets while using SOME manner of restraint on you?"

Maybe they carried me before I was old enough to walk, and once or twice I can recall that they held my hand, but for the most part, no. I mainly remember them reminding me to look both ways, and coaching me on when to walk and when to stop, but as far back as I can remember, when I was walking, I was walking alone. (Hey, DJ, cue the emo-era Greenday! ;) )
"That just isn't an option for many folks. There have been many times since I had kids where not taking the kids shopping meant no groceries."

...really?

...honestly?

You had NO friends, colleagues, or family, or neighbors, who could nip out to the store and pick you up a pack of spaghetti noodles and a sack of potatoes?

None?

And you couldn't just order chinese?

Do you live in a mud hut in sub-saharan africa? No? Then I don't believe you. And if that's true, well... maybe having children while lacking any form of a social circle was a bad move, dude.

"So ALL forms of restraining your child for their safety are a substitute for proper parenting?"

See, dude, I'm fine with restraining your kid, I really am. But there's two things I'm fundamentally NOT fine with: those being a lack of freedom, and a leash on a kid. If you hold or carry your kid through a busy street, fine. But let the sucker go once he gets to the other side! Offering guidance is FINE, and commendable. But chaining the tyke up to a stake in your yard, I think, is unacceptable. And the only difference between chainging up your kid to a post to get his excercise, and using a leash, is that with a leash you're the post. The kid doesn't have the freedom to make his own mistakes, and as a result, is robbed opportunities to grow and to learn.

The other problem with leashes is, I will freely admit, one of emotion and perception. Leashes are used on dogs and in sex clubs. I do not see that they have any place on a healthy child. A leash is a device for exerting and maintaining constant control over the object to which it is attached. I am of the opinion - and once again, I do not intend to offend, but I understand that some may be offended, and that is fine - that if your child requires constant control, then you have failed as a parent.

Like I said though, I fail to live up to my own standards all the time, so don't get all hot and bothered. It doesn't mean I think any less of you; it's just the way I see it.
 
Kids who ride bikes and do not get injured are NOT lucky, they are well-trained and do not need helmets.

If you're willing to take that risk with your kids, that's up to you. I know my kids, and I know how they like to challenge the limits of their abilities. Sometimes they fall and get hurt. A helmet is a cheap and easy way to significantly reduce the chances of a head injury.

Granted, my friends and I didn't wear helmets when riding around the neighborhood growing up, and most of us got lucky. Most of us. One kid ended up with a head injury that changed his life.

My kids don't get on a bike, scooter, or skateboard without a helmet. Period.

As someone who has been a serious cyclist for a very long time (including 10+ years of racing), I still don't leave my driveway without a helmet on my head. I trust my skills on a bike. I don't trust the skills of the driver in the car coming up behind me.
 
Ah, Borgman, I've missed butting heads with you! ;)

With all due respect, my own personal opinion - and I don't mind if you or anybody else differs, that's what makes our two countries great - is that if your front yard is a potentially lethal space for a young child, or your favourite restaurant, then you have failed/are failing in your responsibility to your child to provide a safe environment in which to grow up.

I think you fail to understand the car culture of the USA in some ways. Probably 80% of public places require navigation of some area where death is near.

I live on a road. A road where one step into it might equal death. The places I eat and shop are on roads, near parking lots, etc.



(Feel free to be offended, but please understand I don't mean any offence, nor think any less of you or anybody; I fail to live up to most of the standards I impose on myself too, so it's not like I'm judging by saying that.)

Heh, the day I get offended by something on the internet is the day I kill myself.

"Did they take you across any busy streets while using SOME manner of restraint on you?"

Maybe they carried me before I was old enough to walk, and once or twice I can recall that they held my hand, but for the most part, no.

You must not have crossed many streets at an early age then... my kids could walk at 1 year of age, but neither were safe to trustworthily cross the road without assistance until they were 5-6 years old.


"That just isn't an option for many folks. There have been many times since I had kids where not taking the kids shopping meant no groceries."

...really?

...honestly?

You had NO friends, colleagues, or family, or neighbors, who could nip out to the store and pick you up a pack of spaghetti noodles and a sack of potatoes?

None?

Short term, yes.

Could I have waited a day or two and gotten groceries? Sure.

Would my limited number of friends in the area have gotten tired of fetching me groceries after a couple times and told me to just haul my kid to the store like normal people? Definitely.



"So ALL forms of restraining your child for their safety are a substitute for proper parenting?"

See, dude, I'm fine with restraining your kid, I really am. But there's two things I'm fundamentally NOT fine with: those being a lack of freedom, and a leash on a kid.

All forms of restraint are a "lack of freedom"

If I put my kid on a leash to walk across a busy parking lot then take it off that is no more a lack of freedom than picking the kid up and carrying them across parking lot.

If you hold or carry your kid through a busy street, fine. But let the sucker go once he gets to the other side!

Why is there this assumption that parents who use leashes (as opposed to parents who use slings, backpacks, handholding, etc.) are keeping them restrained more?

And the only difference between chainging up your kid to a post to get his excercise, and using a leash, is that with a leash you're the post. The kid doesn't have the freedom to make his own mistakes, and as a result, is robbed opportunities to grow and to learn.

...and when you strap a kid in the cart at the grocery store the kid doesn't have the freedom to make his own mistakes, and as a result, is robbed opportunities to grow and to learn.

...and when you hold a kid back from running into the street he kid doesn't have the freedom to make his own mistakes, and as a result, is robbed opportunities to grow and to learn.

A leash is a device for exerting and maintaining constant control over the object to which it is attached.

Yep.

So is a sling, or a backpack carrier, or the seatbelt in the shopping cart at the grocery store, or...

I am of the opinion - and once again, I do not intend to offend, but I understand that some may be offended, and that is fine - that if your child requires constant control, then you have failed as a parent.

I think this shows a distinct lack of understanding of early childhood mental development. In certain environments, children of certain ages require constant control.

Claiming that it is an example of failed parenting is like claiming that a 3 month old baby's inability to speak is an example of failed parenting.