As a middle aged father of two grown boys, one of the things I wish I had done better was encourage them to go out on their own more. Their mother would always be so worried, and knowing she has the best intention for them I would give in.
Also there was a couple of years when they were young I would try to force them to go outside and play, but they would quickly become bored and come back in the house. This was so frustrating at the time and then I realized that there were no other kids playing outside either. When I was growing up in the 80s and early 90s, I practically lived outside with my friends.
My boys are significantly more dependent on us, much less capable and their development seems stunted or slowed, which I am sure is partly due to the pandemic, but also due to the sheltering that has become normalized in our culture. Allowing this to happen is one of my biggest regrets as a father, which all things considered I guess isn’t that bad while keeping things in perspective.
I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that the abundance of information has a side effect of over protectiveness. This makes some sense as it would be evolutionarily beneficial to protect against potential threats, however media is tricking our brains to believe that these threats are both abundant and persistent.
Children need unsupervised freedom as part of their development, it allows them to learn how to navigate the world in a healthy regulated way, and how to deal with challenges, like problem solving or social interaction. The perception that the world is a dangerous place that children need constant protection from is flawed. If that were true, we would have never have survived as a species.
I haven’t seen many references to Reason, and previous to this story I had not heard of them before. Most of the stories I am seeing are sourcing the mother. She seems to be doing a lot of interviews.
I never made claims regarding knowing the full story. Not sure anyone can know the full story until the other parties start talking. I was only responding to the claim that the story should be dismissed because of the source, and claims of what the sources motivations are.
I am supportive of reserving judgement for when more information comes out. I am just not supportive of jumping to the conclusion that because the linked article is from a questionable or biased source that it is automatically dismissed as fabrication and/or propaganda. Especially when there is so many organization who seem to be in defense of the mother.