3 ms·

Was being a latchkey kid seen as a good thing generally? I see this article talk about “but there is a dark side” of being a latchkey kid but that doesn’t seem

by yapyap 2y ago

Was being a latchkey kid seen as a good thing generally? I see this article talk about “but there is a dark side” of being a latchkey kid but that doesn’t seem that surprising to me tbh, absent parental figures never seem to be a good thing.

rootusrootus 2y ago
> Was being a latchkey kid seen as a good thing generally? Only by the people who fondly describe their childhood that way. The term itself is very indicative of how the person feels about it.
millzlane 2y ago
It depends. In elementary school my younger brother and I took a public transit bus to school. It was out of necessity or my mother wouldn't have been able to work two jobs without us being latch key kids. We knew how to iron our clothes, cook breakfast on a stove and use a fry daddy for chicken nuggets and fries. Often times we were only latchkey kids in the morning and after school would walk to our aunts or grandmoms and wait for mom after work. We were largely unsupervised in Baltimore. Was it a good thing that we were autonomous and had the freedom to make mistakes without a guarding there to ensure they were responsible for our mistake..? Maybe. But I don't think any bad came from being a latchkey kid. IMO, SHTF in a kid's teenage years. I think it's way more important to be supervised in the pre-teen/teen years than a youner years. Simply because teenagers get into way more mischief that young kids.
bluGill 2y ago
It was seen as a thing that was. Some of my peers (in first grade!) got home to a parent, some had a key and got home to an empty house. The question wasn't was someone home when they got off school, but did the parents get home and create a great family life for the rest of the night.
Suppafly 2y ago
>Was being a latchkey kid seen as a good thing generally? I think it's mostly seen as an unfortunately economic necessity, but some of those kids grew up and now look back upon that time favorably because the parental neglect let them develop a sense of independence.
- ianbutler 2y ago
  A few hours of alone time per day is not neglect, that's a ridiculous view. If you meant general neglect even when the parents were home than sure I can see it, but even TFA points out when adjusted for other factors a few hours of alone time has no negative effect.
- superfrank 2y ago
  > because the parental neglect let them develop a sense of independence. Parental neglect is an incredibly strong (and I'd argue biased) word to use here if we're using the articles definition of a latch key kid. The article says "3.5 million latchkey kids in the U.S., or seven per cent of those between the ages of 5 and 13". There's a massive difference between a 5 year old being home alone for a few hours each day and a teenager being home alone for a few hours. Even more so if, like it says in the article, there's support systems in place (like a neighbor that can be contacted in case of an emergency) and an established pattern (the kid isn't just unexpectedly home alone). An 8 year old unexpectedly left home alone for an unknown amount of time without any support system could absolutely be called neglect (although it makes a great Christmas movie), but a 16 year old in an empty house from 2:30-5 every day with a full fridge and friendly neighbors next door is completely reasonable and (IMO) a healthy way to let them develop independence.
  - margalabargala 2y ago
    It's a term used by this very article, opening the second paragraph. > This is a by-now standard Gen X coping mechanism: treating childhood neglect – in this case, taking care of ourselves after school – as a matter of significant pride, part of our generational identity.
    - superfrank 2y ago
      That's fair. I missed that when I read it. I still stand by my point, but now it should be more directed at the author of the article and not the comment I replied to
    - Suppafly 2y ago
paulpauper 2y ago
If the parents are otherwise supportive it does not seem like that bad of a thing
fragmede 2y ago
The way I remember it, it was used pejoratively, and that kids who were, were somehow deprived, and wouldn't grow up "correctly", until the generation of kids that described grew up, and it turns out they grew up just fine so it stopped being a pejorative. It was a pejorative against kids not growing up in a traditional family, with a breadwinner father, and a stay-at-home homemaker mother, as that was the only family arrangement that was allowed at that time, and any deviation was seen as deviant.
- technothrasher 2y ago
  That's how I remember it as well. There were lots of reports in the 80's about the crisis of the latchkey kid, but we all just saw it as neither good nor bad, just... normal. I went to an expensive private prep high school, and most of the kid's parents were both working professionals. There were definitely kids who had broken homes, and kids who had well adjusted family lives, but pretty much everybody was going home at the end of the school day to an empty house for at least a few hours.
burningChrome 2y ago
>> Was being a latchkey kid seen as a good thing generally? Yes. When I was 9 or 10 my neighbors and I would grab the $5 our parents left behind for us. We'd walk down to the local hockey/skating rink. Usually pretty early around 8-9am before the warming house opened. We'd skate until noon when the warming house guy closed it and went home for lunch. Three or four of us would then walk to the local BK, eat lunch and hang out until 1pm. We'd then go back and skate until dusk. We'd go home around 6-7 and when we got home our parents would be home, and dinner would be ready where we'd go through each family member and talk about their day. All through primary school this was the norm. My dad worked at a high tech company was gone usually from 7am sometimes until 7 or 8pm. My mom was taking college courses during the day and sometimes at night to become an attorney. My sister and brother were fine being on our own. The one constant was my mom or dad would get home, change their clothes and start dinner. If both parents were home, I'd go play catch with Dad while Mom made dinner. We never felt neglected since many of the neighbors were in the same situation so we more often than not would hang out at their house, or get together in the street and play many kinds of sports or if the girls were there, we would play games like red light green light, tag, hide and go seek, kick the can, etc until we all got called home for dinner. It was more or less just being independent for a while until your parents got home and you had dinner and then you'd do your homework before going to practice or your games. My mom and dad made it a point to be at every game they could. They made sure we were carpooling other kids who's parents were gone or couldn't drive them for whatever reason. I think there is a huge difference saying parents in this era were neglectful. They weren't, they just had kids who were brought up well enough to stay out of trouble, take of ourselves and our neighbors until our parents would be available again. There were plenty of times where parents of one household would essentially be watching over three or four different families kids while they were out. So it was never neglectful, I like to think it just a community watching out for each other and working together to allow families the time and energy to do what they needed to do to keep their kids feed, clothed and a roof over their head. Nowadays you just hear too many excuses. Back then? There were none, you just did what you had to in order to get by and everybody in my neighborhood chipped in any way they could.
- soco 2y ago
  It's easy to blame today the parents or their excuses, but back then as you said, there was a community, and much less cars on the streets, and I could go on. You had a bike back then, right? Can you see the 10 years old you riding a bike in your present neighborhood? How much do you carpool today with your neighbors?
JasserInicide 2y ago
It's typical survivor bias bullshit. Those who went through it and happened to turn out relatively OK have no problem wearing it as a badge of pride. Same thing with people whose parents dished out corporal punishment.

by yapyap 2y ago

rootusrootus 2y ago

> Was being a latchkey kid seen as a good thing generally? Only by the people who fondly describe their childhood that way. The term itself is very indicative of how the person feels about it.

millzlane 2y ago

It depends. In elementary school my younger brother and I took a public transit bus to school. It was out of necessity or my mother wouldn't have been able to work two jobs without us being latch key kids. We knew how to iron our clothes, cook breakfast on a stove and use a fry daddy for chicken nuggets and fries. Often times we were only latchkey kids in the morning and after school would walk to our aunts or grandmoms and wait for mom after work. We were largely unsupervised in Baltimore. Was it a good thing that we were autonomous and had the freedom to make mistakes without a guarding there to ensure they were responsible for our mistake..? Maybe. But I don't think any bad came from being a latchkey kid. IMO, SHTF in a kid's teenage years. I think it's way more important to be supervised in the pre-teen/teen years than a youner years. Simply because teenagers get into way more mischief that young kids.

bluGill 2y ago

It was seen as a thing that was. Some of my peers (in first grade!) got home to a parent, some had a key and got home to an empty house. The question wasn't was someone home when they got off school, but did the parents get home and create a great family life for the rest of the night.

Suppafly 2y ago

>Was being a latchkey kid seen as a good thing generally? I think it's mostly seen as an unfortunately economic necessity, but some of those kids grew up and now look back upon that time favorably because the parental neglect let them develop a sense of independence.

ianbutler 2y ago
A few hours of alone time per day is not neglect, that's a ridiculous view. If you meant general neglect even when the parents were home than sure I can see it, but even TFA points out when adjusted for other factors a few hours of alone time has no negative effect.
superfrank 2y ago
> because the parental neglect let them develop a sense of independence. Parental neglect is an incredibly strong (and I'd argue biased) word to use here if we're using the articles definition of a latch key kid. The article says "3.5 million latchkey kids in the U.S., or seven per cent of those between the ages of 5 and 13". There's a massive difference between a 5 year old being home alone for a few hours each day and a teenager being home alone for a few hours. Even more so if, like it says in the article, there's support systems in place (like a neighbor that can be contacted in case of an emergency) and an established pattern (the kid isn't just unexpectedly home alone). An 8 year old unexpectedly left home alone for an unknown amount of time without any support system could absolutely be called neglect (although it makes a great Christmas movie), but a 16 year old in an empty house from 2:30-5 every day with a full fridge and friendly neighbors next door is completely reasonable and (IMO) a healthy way to let them develop independence.
- margalabargala 2y ago
  It's a term used by this very article, opening the second paragraph. > This is a by-now standard Gen X coping mechanism: treating childhood neglect – in this case, taking care of ourselves after school – as a matter of significant pride, part of our generational identity.
  - superfrank 2y ago
    That's fair. I missed that when I read it. I still stand by my point, but now it should be more directed at the author of the article and not the comment I replied to
  - Suppafly 2y ago

paulpauper 2y ago

If the parents are otherwise supportive it does not seem like that bad of a thing

fragmede 2y ago

The way I remember it, it was used pejoratively, and that kids who were, were somehow deprived, and wouldn't grow up "correctly", until the generation of kids that described grew up, and it turns out they grew up just fine so it stopped being a pejorative. It was a pejorative against kids not growing up in a traditional family, with a breadwinner father, and a stay-at-home homemaker mother, as that was the only family arrangement that was allowed at that time, and any deviation was seen as deviant.

technothrasher 2y ago
That's how I remember it as well. There were lots of reports in the 80's about the crisis of the latchkey kid, but we all just saw it as neither good nor bad, just... normal. I went to an expensive private prep high school, and most of the kid's parents were both working professionals. There were definitely kids who had broken homes, and kids who had well adjusted family lives, but pretty much everybody was going home at the end of the school day to an empty house for at least a few hours.

burningChrome 2y ago

>> Was being a latchkey kid seen as a good thing generally? Yes. When I was 9 or 10 my neighbors and I would grab the $5 our parents left behind for us. We'd walk down to the local hockey/skating rink. Usually pretty early around 8-9am before the warming house opened. We'd skate until noon when the warming house guy closed it and went home for lunch. Three or four of us would then walk to the local BK, eat lunch and hang out until 1pm. We'd then go back and skate until dusk. We'd go home around 6-7 and when we got home our parents would be home, and dinner would be ready where we'd go through each family member and talk about their day. All through primary school this was the norm. My dad worked at a high tech company was gone usually from 7am sometimes until 7 or 8pm. My mom was taking college courses during the day and sometimes at night to become an attorney. My sister and brother were fine being on our own. The one constant was my mom or dad would get home, change their clothes and start dinner. If both parents were home, I'd go play catch with Dad while Mom made dinner. We never felt neglected since many of the neighbors were in the same situation so we more often than not would hang out at their house, or get together in the street and play many kinds of sports or if the girls were there, we would play games like red light green light, tag, hide and go seek, kick the can, etc until we all got called home for dinner. It was more or less just being independent for a while until your parents got home and you had dinner and then you'd do your homework before going to practice or your games. My mom and dad made it a point to be at every game they could. They made sure we were carpooling other kids who's parents were gone or couldn't drive them for whatever reason. I think there is a huge difference saying parents in this era were neglectful. They weren't, they just had kids who were brought up well enough to stay out of trouble, take of ourselves and our neighbors until our parents would be available again. There were plenty of times where parents of one household would essentially be watching over three or four different families kids while they were out. So it was never neglectful, I like to think it just a community watching out for each other and working together to allow families the time and energy to do what they needed to do to keep their kids feed, clothed and a roof over their head. Nowadays you just hear too many excuses. Back then? There were none, you just did what you had to in order to get by and everybody in my neighborhood chipped in any way they could.

soco 2y ago
It's easy to blame today the parents or their excuses, but back then as you said, there was a community, and much less cars on the streets, and I could go on. You had a bike back then, right? Can you see the 10 years old you riding a bike in your present neighborhood? How much do you carpool today with your neighbors?

JasserInicide 2y ago

It's typical survivor bias bullshit. Those who went through it and happened to turn out relatively OK have no problem wearing it as a badge of pride. Same thing with people whose parents dished out corporal punishment.