The danger from knives is obvious to most children, and a cut probably isn't going to seriously injure them. Knives are not marketed as toys, and have a use other than being played with. If a child is injured by a knife, you will know it quickly, and understand the extent of the problem. Half of the people in this thread are comparing it to swallowing a penny, which is so harmless that you could make it a hobby.
You don't know many children then - I have personally endangered mine and that of friends while I was around 10-12. The most telling example - a close friend (we were both 12) wanted me to attack him with knife to show me how to block. It was pure luck I tried to stab him at much slower speed than I was able so the whole story ended with his very deeply cut palm instead of blade in the guts.
Children are not stupid but they have some very vague concepts of what is safe.
I don't think kids should learn to use cutlery at such early age, not without proper ethics training. Cutlery gives you a lot of power. The power to do both good and evil. Children just don't have that kind of judgement.
If you teach a kid to eat with a knife and fork and they end up stabbing someone, who is going to take responsibility? Does the kid get tried as an adult or juvenile?
Our former 2 year-old and current two year-old have neither choked on their marbles. Why? Supervision. You play with your kids and then you can stop them doing stupid things that are going to cause them high-level harm.
The hard part I find is letting them hurt themselves as part of their learning.
Indeed our 2 year-old just used a kitchen knife (about as long as his forearm) for the first time a couple of weeks ago to chop the potatoes he peeled. Close supervision.
"He could swallow a marble", well yes, he could bash his brother's head in with the corner of an iPad, get hit by a meteorite, run in to a wall, drown himself in the toilet, etc..
But if you give a very sharp knife to a toddler and say "go on, have fun" and walk off, you're probably going to face child endangerment charges at some point.
Children must be allowed to do dangerous things. Doing dangerous things does not guarantee injury. Children, despite our observations otherwise, do not have a death wish. They have a strong self-preservation instinct and purposefully risky behavior is usually due to ignorance because they don't understand how the world works yet. A child wants to touch the candle flame because they don't know it's hot, not because they want to get burned.
Doing dangerous things is risky though. A child is NOT guaranteed to get hurt everytime but if you allow them to explore the work and engage in risky behavior they will get hurt eventually. It is my goal as a parent to let them do dangerous things from an early age even when it scares me.
At one that means letting them walk without a walker anad without being there to catch them all the time. At two-four it means letting them climb the stairs on their own and letting them swing and go down the slide without hand holding. At 5+ it means letting them build a fire, swim in the creek, shoot a bow and arrow and climb trees. By giving them freedom (and responsibility - but that's another topic) early they learn what their limits are and, I hope, learn to judge for themselves what is safe for them. This may be different for each of my kids and is almost certainly different than what I believe is safe and or appropriate. Of course I am there to veto really misinformed decisions (we are going to build a diving board into this 2 feet pool in the brook!) and to provide direction and guidance.
Putting this into practice has resulted in one broken arm, three staples and numerous small home-treatable cuts and bruises.
I don't always like where this philosophy puts me as a father. I many times say yes and then quietly follow from a distance out of my own fear for their safety.
But because I know what a struggle it is to decide how to raise my children, even if the ultimate decision is that I am not raising them so much as watching them develop and prodding them occasionally, I try very hard not to judge parents who have made different decisions and different trade-offs.
The article doesn't go into much detail about why people judge parents so harshly but mostly focuses on changing social norms. I understand though. I have to actively remind myself NOT to judge parents who make different decisions than I do and I'm only aware of that because I have made decisions that are different than most of my peers and acquaintances.
Is that really a bad thing? Minor things like that teach the kids how to handle tools and machinery, so they can operate safely the dangerous tools adults use. Like most boys, I had to learn the hard way to not put my finger in a light socket, and how to not stab myself when the screwdriver slips.
"yet we don't let our kids run around with knives for example."
Actually some do. Boy scouts traditionally for example do not think, that kids are generally to be treated as idiots.
So yes, you do not give a knive to someone who cannot handle it. There are 20 year olds who should not be given anything sharper than a plastic knive. But a ordinary child usually can handle dangerous stuff - you lead them there, step by step.
Same with computers, smartphones etc. If neccessary, you can provide a locked down environment at first, with only approved apps and sites (or no internet at all).
But one day, they need to handle it all, without someone holding their hands. And they cannot learn it, if they always only navigated a locked down safe space.
This was a risky situation but much different than someone willingly coming at you with a knife, the fact that he could dodge him easily is proof of that.
People have different ideas of “responsible”, and different levels of risk they are comfortable with.
I read an article a year ago about an anthropologist doing field work somewhere in a hunter-gatherer village in Africa marveling that a 9-month-old baby was playing with a machete. The anthropologist asked the mother if she was afraid the kid would get hurt. The mother said “he’ll figure out soon that the machete is sharp, and then be careful after that.”
Personally handing a baby a machete is a bit much for me, but my not-quite-2 year old and I walk around barefoot all the time in the city, and people are constantly asking me if I’m worried about broken glass or whatever.
So basically, boy acted like normal 4 years old and took an interesting thing into hand? And that is somehow proof that the kid is exceptionally difficult? Four years old holding knife right now is a reason to tell him to put it down or introduce consistent safety rules, but really really it is neither proof of unusual out of control behavior or something that requires instant yelling.
Four years old can be taught to cut soft vegetables under close supervision. However, if you constantly yell at four years old, four years old will learn to ignore everything except yelling.
Not that occasional yelling harms that kid or something. But, yelling often is more of adult emotional reaction, not a rational reaction to real acute danger.
First-hand experience is the best way to learn _anything_. It doesn't guarantee learning, of course, but it sure beats reading about it, or, if you're a kid, getting advice from grown-ups you rebelliously distrust. Small children before they've reached the age of reasoning just can't learn from sage advice anyway.
> I think it's good that kids toys (mostly) no longer can cause lasting damage to children.
We're not talking about lasting damage here. We're talking about a few scrapes and bruises that will (hopefully) teach them to avoid making sillier mistakes in the future. This is what the article is lamenting kids toys don't provide anymore.
This is not health & safety gone mad.
reply