"Unfounded Child Neglect" Ruling Highlights Adult Mistakes

So, “unfounded,” huh? Let’s talk about what’s really unfounded. The idea that kids today are somehow more at risk than they were two decades ago? Nope. The belief that children are in grave danger if they’re not under adult watch 24/7? Totally unfounded. And the notion that any random predator will pounce on a child left alone for even a second? Yeah, not backed by any evidence.

What is substantiated, though, is the thoughtful parenting of Anna and Mark Johnson, the Maryland couple who let their 10-year-old son and 6-year-old daughter walk home from a park by themselves. This decision sent alarm bells ringing for overzealous officials and keyboard warriors alike.

A Bold Statement

Here’s a bold statement: when a state’s law allows parents to use their own judgment (Maryland law doesn’t address kids outside alone, only when they’re left at home or in cars), then guess what? It’s the parents’ call! Not yours, random driver. Not yours, Internet critic. The people who know those kids best are—surprise—their parents. And the family knows their own dynamics better than anyone else. The law should say: mind your own business. If you see a child who seems safe, how about not calling the cops? Trust your instincts.

Now, I’m taking a deep breath. Yes, there are exceptions. Some families may have dynamics that are definitely harmful. Sure, some parents neglect their kids. And yes, those situations need investigation. Child Protective Services and the police have a tough job balancing child safety and family privacy. You’d think the line between what constitutes harm and what doesn’t would be clear-cut. But with the number of “well-meaning” strangers pushing for investigations of everyday families, that line has become increasingly blurred.

In this instance, the allegations against the Johnsons were looked into. The kids were interviewed. The parents were interviewed. It was evident that these children weren’t just dumped in the wild without guidance. The family aims to teach their kids independence and responsibility—a fact communicated to the police and CPS. The parents exercised their discretion based on their children’s maturity, only for that discretion to be challenged.

To All the Critics

To all the critics out there: it’s perfectly fine to disagree with the choices a family makes, but you don’t get to shame them for parenting differently than you would. If they were breaking the law or truly endangering their children? Absolutely, then call for accountability. But labeling a loving family as neglectful when there’s no solid evidence? That’s just wrong.

If you believe these kids were neglected, have the courage to say so. If not, leave them be. Making families live in uncertainty over ambiguous rules is just plain mean. If Maryland considers allowing kids to walk alone as neglect, it’s time to change the law. Leaving families in a state of limbo because of vague interpretations is, as my friend’s kid recently said, “not cool.”

Laws about unattended children were supposed to protect parents, but they seem to give more power to strangers first, then to law enforcement, and finally to CPS. In the Johnsons’ case, the most unsubstantiated aspect is the effectiveness of Maryland’s Unattended Children Law. That’s a shame because some kids genuinely need protection—not from parenting styles that differ from those of passersby.

Summary

The article critiques the ruling against parents allowing their children some independence, arguing that it reflects societal fears rather than the reality of parenting. While acknowledging that some families do face real issues, it defends the Johnsons’ decision to let their kids walk home, emphasizing the importance of parental discretion and the need for clearer laws protecting that discretion.

“Unfounded Child Neglect” Ruling Highlights Adult Mistakes

A Bold Statement

To All the Critics

Further Reading

Summary

Related Topics: