> Your point is not valid. Which point? That we didn't have solar panels, cellphones, etc? Because I'm pretty sure we didn't. Or that "off grid" living with c

> Your point is not valid. Which point? That we didn't have solar panels, cellphones, etc? Because I'm pretty sure we didn't. Or that "off grid" living with children isn't necessarily "child endangerment"? We had much fewer amenities than most of the current "off grid" people and yet my childhood was perfectly safe, loving, and I developed into an adult with an Ivy League degree and good career in technology. I turned out better than a lot of kids whose parents had high paying jobs and used money to replace actual affection and time spent with them. Where do you draw the line on "raising your child without best chances in life"? If you don't buy them the absolute latest iPhone and fashionable clothes so they can be popular in their schools is that child endangerment? If you don't take a second job so you can get them into a more expensive private school, is that child endangerment? You said that you "want a story like this from a family with children". It seems like what you meant was that you want a story like this from a family with children that supports your own conclusions, not one that might refute them.