Bubble-wrapped Kids Versus the NYC Subway Experiment

I recently heard about two very different approaches to raising our children, and it got me thinking in a big way. One method "bubble-wraps" our kids and the opposite one forces them to become independent at an early age. One New York mom pressed this issue with her recent "subway experiment."

What is a "bubble-wrapped" kid?

According to Michael Ungar, a social worker and author of a new book, Too Safe for Their Own Good, a "bubble-wrapped" kid is one who is denied opportunities to experience risk and responsibility. If you've walked into a Babies R' Us lately, you know what he is talking about. There are new products designed to help toddlers from the dangers of well, toddling. The Walking Aid helps minimize the "bumps, bruises, and tears" usually associated with teaching kids to walk. There are also kneepads, headgear and a Love Handle Toddler Harness. To keep your kids safe from germs in public places, there is "Glovies," disposable sanitary hand covers. Yikes. Do we really need all of this to protect our kids? Certain devices have been proven scientifically to help prevent serious injuries, like bike helmets and car seats. However, are these newer safety devices doing more harm than good?

The "bubble-wrap" syndrome goes beyond toddlerhood, and people are speaking out against it. Milwaukee radio host Charles Sykes is taking on the trend of "bubble-wrapped" kids in his new book, 50 Rules Kids Won't Learn in School. My personal favorite is rule number nine: "Your school may have done away with winners and losers. Life hasn't."

Skyes explains: "The modern 'bubble wrap' mentality assumes that children are so frail and easily bruised that they have to be insulated...from life. No losing, no disappointments, no harsh reality checks. But like a child who grows up in a bubble without immunities to the outsides world, a child raised in bubble wrap is not prepared for the symptoms of life: failure, frustration, and having to make choices tougher than the color of their new iPod sleeve.

The Subway Experiment: the opposite end of the spectrum

A New York mom recently stirred controversy when she recently left her 9-year-old son at a Bloomingdale's in midtown Manhattan with a Metrocard for the subway, a subway map, $20, and told him she'd see him when he got back home. Izzy, who is now 10, insisted it was no big deal. He had been nagging his mother for a long time to let him ride home alone, and finally she agreed to let him take the downtown Lexington Avenue subway and then transfer to a crosstown bus to get home from Bloomingdale's. Mom Lenore Skenazy wrote a column about it, and stirred up a swarm of opinions on both sides of the fence. She said, "A kid who goes out without a nanny, a helmet and a security detail is a national news story, and his mother is a candidate for child-abuse charges.." She continued, "It's safe to go on the subway. It's safe to be a kid. It's safe to ride your bike on the streets."

Isn't there a middle ground?

My sons made it through the perils of toddlerhood and early childhood without today's army of over-the-top safety products. While they suffered their share of scrapes, bruises and an occasional broken bone, I feel that their falls taught them long-term safety lessons. I did not "bubble-wrap" them, nor do I do so now that they're older. My 14-year-old plays football, and has done so for four years. Yes, he's suffered minor bruises and sore joints, but he has not broken a bone or suffered a serious injury. In reality, he gets hurt more often on his skateboard than on the football field. Both of my sons have learned important lessons about teamwork, cooperation and resiliency from team sports. Yes, there is a winner and a loser, just like in real life.

On the other hand, when I read about the New York City mom's subway experiment, my immediate reaction was one of apprehension. A 9-year-old child seems awfully young to find his way home on a subway. I don't know if I would have the courage (or stupidity?) to do this to one of my children. Spunky Izzy did indeed find his way home, and his mom said he learned a valuable lesson about independence and self-reliance. To be quite honest, I respect the lesson she taught her son, but personally I would have chosen a different method to teach that lesson.

So, is there a middle ground between "bubble-wrapping" and the subway experiment? I certainly think so. In today's complex society, there is not just black and white, but a sizeable amount of gray territory. I think that's where most parents fall when it comes to raising their kids.

What do you think? Are you in favor of bubble-wrapping or the subway experiment? I'd love to hear how others weigh in on this issue.

If you enjoyed this article, you might also enjoy:

Top 10 ways to cope with puberty - a family survival guide