If the law is ambiguous, then why didn't the father just receive a warning?
Has his family been in trouble with the law before?
How were these children endangered?
Is this park littered with broken glass, hypodermic needles, and a hangout for prostitutes and crack dealers?
Were these children injured?
Did they solicite this mom for help?
I wouldn't expect a 9yo to give me a perfect explanation. Maybe he was taught not to talk to strangers. If I "felt uncomfortable leaving them there" I WOULD HAVE STAYED TO TALK TO THE DAD. To call the police on kids playing happily in a park is INSANE.
What a monumental waste of time(and resources) this is for local police and this family.

"and that the children did not have an ability to contact anyone in the event of an emergency." Uh, they could contact the cops, and their father could be contacted, obviously. Is the problem that these kids didn't have their own cellphone?

"She spoke to the boy, who told her their father went to park the car at LA Fitness" ... and that's exactly what the father did, so that means the kid obviously knew what was going on.

@Amanda... How would the children contact the police? And I'm not sure how parking the car at a gym three miles away would make sense to anyone else at the scene.

Is it possible that some of this stems from misunderstandings due to a language barrier? Did the children know their dad's cell phone number or a number to call their mother?

This will end badly. Those unfortunate kids are about to get a lesson in state control they will never forget. And they won't have their dad there to help them through this because he's DANGEROUS! Best case - the kids end up in a foster home. Worst case - Dad's in jail.

But the unnamed woman, the police, and Child Services all get to feel morally superior. Secreet's statements made that abundantly clear. They also made me feel sick to my stomach. They took care of that bad dad all right. He's gonna get his.

Several folks have made noise on Patch about all the commentary coming from folks who don't know, or live in, your community. I for one am feeling very fortunate that I don't. You folks have some soul searching to do.

is the chief of police saying that scott park is not a safe place? if so, the root of the problem needs to be addressed: the level of safety at the park. It is the parents judgement whether their children can be left to play at a park. Once again, persecuting the victimized. So typical.

Wait a minute. Per the previous article, the kids had a cell phone, and the dad had a cell phone. Yet, they had no recourse in case something happened. Maybe this was due to some atmospheric disturbance that would have rendered all cell towers inoperable the minute one of the kids broke his/her arm (because you KNOW that was gonna happen.) PA must be some kind of odd place where kids with cell phone plus dad with cell phone equals "no recourse".

Why is whether or not leaving children to play in a park unsupervised by an adult a judgement call by law enforcement, and NOT the parent???

It still doesn't make sense that they are charging him, even with the the police explanation. The explanation is basically that we did it b/ c he was off on his time, and just because we think he shouldn't do that. Parents should have the right to decide is what is safe for their kids. Unless the children are hurt, aren't fed, etc... the police need to stay out of parenting. Otherwise, it's just them forming an opinion, however uninformed (by research, child development experts, and statistics) and going with it. "Could have been hurt" is not a legit excuse for charging him. Your kid could be hurt or killed riding in your car (and are far more likely to than if they are left at the park at ages 6 and 9), yet we do not charge people with child endangerment for that. This is just wrong. And it's not just Free Rangers. This is spreading like wildfire through Facebook. Every comment I've seen on my page and my friends who have reposted has been outrage.

I think that this is a case of the police not wanting to lose face by backing down on something that is wrong. Cops are notorious for wanting to save face at any cost, hence why they have some of the highest rates of domestic violence of any profession. A lot of cops have very controlling personalities. I think they are just digging their heals in on this.

Great reporting on this situation Mike. Also, I'm a little disturbed by all the negative comments towards the woman who alerted the police. It sure seems to me that Mr. Narayanasamy was clearly in the wrong.

I know I'm joining the conversation late, and much has already been said, but here's the problem in a nutshell. We as a society have been conditioned to believe that things are far worse than they are, and that we can control all situations simply with our presence. Both are wrong and the facts back this up, BUT people feel better when they do things that reinforce that erroneous conditioning.

Things aren't bad. They're better than they've been in our lifetimes. A parent can't control everything simply by being nearby. The vast majority of crimes against children are perpetrated by someone they know - often a parent or close relative. Nearly all strangers will go out of their way to help when asked.

Those are the facts, but we've been trained by years of sensationalist news programs to react opposite of reality. We've turned reality on its head and embraced a worst-first mentality that assumes popular fiction is real and reality is meaningless.

Free Range Kids and the like are the collective screams of parents who can see the truth and want to let everyone know they're "mad as he'll and not going to take it anymore!"

To all I say, embrace reality. It's a much nicer place.

Would all these comments be the same if one of the children did get hurt and their parent was not around? Would the Dad then "sue" Scott Township for an "unsafe" park?? In today's crazy world children need supervision unfortunately...

Patti

Ambradley -- I second everything you say. And I'm Lenore Skenazy, the founder of Free-Range Kids.

Thanks for bringing this to everyone's attention Lenore. We are raising a generation of children who later in life will lack the ability to make the simplest of decisions without someone else's input. Children need independence to mature and grow. As a mother of 2 daughters I am appalled that this is being deemed a crime. My brother and I would often spend time wandering our inner city neighbourhood and we are bright, articulate, and successful people. These "life skills" are as important, if not more so, than anything that can be learned in a textbook at school.

@Mike - The term given to today's generation, is 'teacup'. I work in higher ed, and the students arriving in on campus today are fragile, expect things to be carefully laid out for them, and when things go wrong, go completely to pieces - just like a teacup. They've been coddled for so long that they are completely unprepared even for the structured world of the academy. Of course, the academy makes provision for this, and the coddling continues.

Certainly not all, but way too many of the next generation will continue to expect things to simply happen for them. They won't know how to do much of anything themselves, and won't know how to recover from any sort of setback.

This is the generation we are raising, and many of the comments here are testimony to how badly we have, and are continuing, to mess things up. Our kids will be safe, but totally incompetent.

We are all making a lot of assumptions here, and Mike, thanks for the reporting, but none of us were there, none of us have met the parties involved. The police officer who responded made judgement calls about the events. The police chief says there is no "set age" for one child to mind another and that it's a judgement call - case by case. Are we saying a random 9yo is more responsible than a trained police officer?

A question I have for all of the people that are visiting from Free Range is, how far do you all let your children freely roam? Under 5 miles? Over 10 miles? Is there no limit? When they travel freely, do they have cell phones? I'm curious to hear your replies.

The point of Free Range is not that all children should be left alone in a park. It's that the parents can make the choice to do that.
This what if thinking will lead to extremes. First, it's what if the kids get hurt while dad isn't watching? Then it's "What if dad was at home alone with them and had a heart attack and the kids didn't know what to do?" Or, since most abuse and kidnapping occurs by family members and close friends, it'll be "what if dad is secretly a molester and the kids don't know what to do? He's only 9!" The conclusion: no parent should be left alone. Because "What if???" At some point, no parent can do enough to make sure our children are safe at every moment of every day.
THAT is the fear of Free Rangers- that 1) they will no longer be able to make choices for their own children, but that should be left up to police and courts and 2) they can NEVER do enough to make sure their children are perfectly safe. No matter how impossible that is.
I understand the cops concern, I really do. And locating dad was not a bad movie per se- but then charging him? This is criminalizing making personal decisions for our children. If he can be charged for that it sets a precedent. Parents could be charged for allowing their kids in the back yard with out them, or letting them go to a different aisle in the store.

http://www.education.com/magazine/article/preschool-courage/

Don’t overprotect.

Since you asked.... My 10 year old took a city bus to and from school every day last year. This year she takes a train and a bus. She does have a cell phone, mostly because there are no pay phones in my city anymore! I think she would have been able to handle this particular bus to this particular school at 9 -- we just weren't living here then so I can't say for certain. At 11, she does sometimes take responsibility for her 4.5 year old brother around the neighborhood, but not too often -- because he drives her mad, not because she's not able to do it.

Oh, and the 11 year old's school is around 4 miles from home. If she had been assigned to a different middle school, it would have been more like 6 miles, or 8, depending on the route.

Little boy starts Kindergarten this fall. I expect that by 4th grade he'll be traveling to school with a few buddies here and there...

I don't have a problem with the police checking in with the kids or with the dad. Charging the dad with a crime is another thing entirely.

@Amanda, yes a parent likely knows their child better, but that's not true 100% of the time. Abuse, neglect, and endangerment exist. Not around every corner, but they do exist. The woman who called police sounds like she overreacted, but there was something off about the situation to the police officer too, from start to finish. We are making a lot of assumptions here about whether there were language barriers, whether there is bias because they're immigrants - we don't know any of this, all we know is that dad has a "foreign sounding" name. That means nothing.
@Railmeat. No hyperbole here. Just because you and I don't see the genuine peril (and why would we, we weren't there), doesn't mean there wasn't a fishy situation - the officer smelled smoke and believed there to be a fire in that family. Yes, there is a hyper-tendency to smell smoke, but you're saying the officer is wrong in his (or her) assessment of the situation (Big Brother, Nanny State rhetoric). You're making a biased support for the family over the officer, without any facts. Your bias reveals that you do believe any random 9yo (because this kid is a random 9yo you've never met) is more responsible than the police officer trained to make judgement calls about individual situations based on available evidence.
I agree with the basic Free-Range ideas, that we all need to chill out and let kids be kids, but we don't have all the facts. Clearly if we were the jury, with the available facts, we'd acquit.

I would like to remember Adam Walsh, Jaycee Dugard, Elizabeth Smart, JonBenet Ramsey,Jacob Wetterling, Kylar Johnson, Sumer Thompson, Carlie Brucia, Courtney Wilkes, Natalee Holloway, Leiby Kletzky, Etan Patz, Christopher Dansby, Shawn Hornbeck, Ben Ownby, et al. As for FreeRange...After being accused of "moral superiority" I venture to say that the finger points both ways...I also believe that your organization needn't shove your 'philosophies' on others...our country is diverse, as are our communities...our opinions and our styles of parenting...I prefer to keep MY CHILDREN safe and aware and healthy and independent and alive...I know best for my kids...I wish we all lived in your communities where neighborhoods are guaranteed to be safe and utopias...I live in the real world...I think independently with experiences helping me to make decisions and choices...It appears to me that since FreeRange parents permit and encourage their kids to be freeranging at their mature ages of 4 and 5, and basically allow them to live freerange lives because they can handle just about everything--and if they need help, someone will be there for them. Well, that must be why you can spend 24/7 of YOUR adult lives looking for stories like this one to criticize and chastise those of us who do not agree with you.Apparently your kids can raise themselves because you have so much time to comment here.I prefer to enjoy my PARENTING ROLE AND MY KIDS WHILE THEY ARE KIDS! Time to find another story!

I don't get the feeling that the father really thought this through as well as the free range posters do. The kids didn't seem to have an idea of what they would do if a problem arose. If they were responsible enough to be left in a park that was REMOTE FROM THEIR HOME (sorry for the caps, but I think this is often missed here) they could have explained that to the cops and the woman. This is different than letting the kids roam from home to the park. I think the father showed weak judgement, but certainly not criminal. Some posters familiar with the area indicate walking home might not be safe. We don't really know.

I tend to agree with Mike that this will work out okay with the courts. You also have to look at the police side. Once they were brought in, they had a responsibility and culpability. If they had left the kids and one was hurt, you can bet they would be vilified by the press or sued. Unfortunately, those concerns make a part of the decision making process for the police. They probably would have been happier to never have been called. they also probably would have driven by the park without concern, until they were called. They were put in a difficult position that is easy to criticize when not in their shoes.

fc said:
"...our country is diverse, as are our communities...our opinions and our styles of parenting...I prefer to keep MY CHILDREN safe and aware and healthy and independent and alive...I know best for my kids"
YES! YES! YES! I totally agree. My parenting style is quite different from my neighbor's, but we both hold the common goal to do what's best for our children. That is why parents are in charge of their children, not the police.

MY next-door neighbor also holds your view, to protect her kids, she never lets them out of her sight. I allow incremental (earned) independence as they age and show maturity, but she and I disagree and that's just fine. She now needs to medicate her 12 year-old daughter with anti-anxiety meds and sleep meds at night because her daughter is petrified that someone will break in through the window and snatch her at night. The mom also had to cut short a family trip to NYC as this girl clutched her mom's hand so hard, she was scared that someone would kidnap her in the large crowds. But hey, that's your child so you get to raise them the best, safest way you see fit.
My kids enjoy their earned freedom. I refuse to hijack their childhood by thinking irrational thoughts all the time, that the boogieman may be in every bush and that I, SUPERMOM, will save them because I am ever present. They need life skills. They need to play outside. They need to play with friends without a security detail.

APC---You don't know my logic...you have taken a statement out of context....again! My kids are safe in my sight and out or at least I pray they are...REREAD your comments...absurd logic! A bowl of soup---really??? I think as a "freerange parent" you are talking out of both sides of your mouth....AMANDA--Perhaps you don't know what et.al means...It means that there are too many to mention!!!! And I don't hover over my kids, but I would not have left them at a park at age 6 and 9 so I could go take a shower at a gym 3 miles away...And btw---I have EXPERIENCED tragedy in my immediate family---4 were murdered in broad daylight and a few years before, 3 were killed by a drunk driver...I AM SO DONE WITH YOU FREERANGE PEOPLE...PLEASE GO BACK TO YOUR FREERANGE SOCIETY AND LEAVE SCOTT TWP POLICE, PARK, COMMUNITY, ET.AL AND THE Govindaraj Narayanasamy FAMILY ALONE!

And I WISH I had a freelance society to go back to.

Actually, I am annoyed by closed minds, and not in trying to change minds...I am annoyed that others find it okay to misquote, misconstrue, misinterpret, and argue about things ad nauseum...I am annoyed that comments are contrived and statements taken out of context...I am angry that people don't get it that kids at age 6 and 9 have barely been in existance on this planet and are deemed able to care for themselves and no harm shall come of them...especially since I have witnessed and helped on many (too many) occasions when children left alone at the park have been hurt significantly and acutely, and I was the only one to assist, nurture, aid, treat, "mother" these injured children, and not just a skinned knee, bloody nose or splinter!!! I KNOW what can happen...because it HAS!! I also am annoyed that people who don't live in this area and have NO KNOWLEDGE of this AWESOME community, would spend 3 days spewing their argumentative ideologies on us...spewing their criticisms of us on us....It is sooooo sad to me that the very people who profess that we exhibit "moral superiority" are acting in that manner themselves...This whole situation has made me physically ill....I do not want to see this father convicted....I just want to know that he understands that his judgement was not in the best interest of his young children and he will learn from this. I hope his family will be just fine...and Scott Township can move on!

I am a father of two ages 6 and 5 and I would not leave them at the park unsupervised, Also I would not leave them home alone. When I feel that I can trust them I will then and only then leave them alone and act accordingly. I do not care what others think about my parenting and if I broke the law I then will accept the responsibility for my actions. Be judged by a court of law I thought. Am I wrong for my parenting belief or will I be judged because I could care less about what you think! Go Buccs!!!

A few comments say Free Rangers should leave and not tell non-Free Rangers what to do. Do those people realize that's all the Free Rangers are asking? To be left alone by busy-bodies who think they know better? Free Rangers may yell and make a fuss, but when is the last time one called the police because a parent wouldn't let their kids outside or was taking them to a highly organized sporting event?

The finger does point both ways. Free Rangers just don't then use that finger to call the authorities because "they know better."

I can't speak for all Free Rangers, but for me, all I ask is that you not call the police because you see children playing happily and innocently outside, or contentedly walking or riding the bus. But please, please do help if those children are crying, say they're lost, etc. Wouldn't that be nice?

Children are most likely to be hurt, murdered, etc... by their own parents than by strangers.

All this living in fear can actually be traced to... wait for it... capitalism.
1. A consumerist society places a heavy focus on selling merchandise. How do you sell people crap they don't really need? Manufacture need. You want to sell "safety"? Manufacture fear. Parents are suckers for crap they think will make their kids smarter, more popular, more successful, and of course safer.
2. Fear of litigation is a key factor in eliminating various activities and opportunities for kids. Remember the school that got rid of a tree "for safety"!? Why does everyone fear litigation? Because people sue over the stupidest things (hot coffee anyone!?), but of course they do because it's the only way to pay their damn hospital bills.
As long as America fears socialism, this insanity will continue.

Regardless of how people feel aout leaving their children alone at a park with no adult supervision and the fact that they would have to walk home on a busy 4 lane street is not my only concern. I look at this from the kids POV. What if they just felt scared or lonely and needed their dad. Most parents teach their kids not to talk to strangers so going to a nearby house and asking to use their phone is not going to happen. We need to keep our children safe both physically and mentally.

i am sad about those kids being left in a park alone and also sad and disappointed about this whole conversation. Its very simple. We must protect our children not just our own!!!! Bad things can happen to them when we don't. So this lady made a good call. I am sure it was a hard call for her. Thank you for protecting those kids. Let just hope that dad doesnt get mad at the kids for his stupid decision. My heart bleeds for those kids who are in such a mess and did nothing wrong!!!! So very Sad!

@No LovingMom, many parents teach their kids not to GO with strangers and don't get all bent out of shape about simple conversation.

What do you do with your kids on the first day of school, when the teacher is a stranger? What do you teach your kids about interacting with store personnel, waiters/waitresses, or fast food employees? What if a new family joins your church; do your kids completely ignore their kids? And here's a better question: Have you even discussed with your children the, God forbid, possibility that they might be separated from your hip at some point; what would they do, and who would they approach for help?

Teaching kids not to talk to strangers is insane if you ever want them to be able to function in the world. There are strangers every day, everywhere, and in every walk of life.

This dad wasn't gone for so very long. I think some people don't realize just how awful this arrest of their dad, with the upcoming legal battle and the child protective services investigation, is and is going to be for these children. I believe, from the kids' point of view, that they were just fine and having a fun time at the park, and then their dad, the man they look up to most in the world, was just taken down many pegs, by big, bully strangers (the cops), and these kids are not going to feel truly safe for the rest of their childhood. Something essential to these children's childhood happiness and well-being has been permanently destroyed--and not by their father.

My 9 year old son has a ball game tomorrow afternoon at Scott Field. I think I'll drop him off and go get my nails done, get a work out in at the gym, do a little grocery shopping, and maybe have a nice quiet lunch. I don't know the other parents or coaches on his team well but that ok it will be a good life lesson for him to figure out how to handle things if he were to get hurt, if their is a rain out, or if I run a little late. He's not my responsibility, he's his own and no one should bother to try and help him, that would be intrusive, nosey, "do gooder". After all he is 9. Now if anyone can't see how selfish and completely irresponsible that is then you and I live in a different world.

Good grief. Your child does not need you during a baseball game when he has at least one coach and an entire baseball team. Believe it or not, you are not so vital to your child's minute-by-minute existence that he cannot survive a baseball game without you. If you would like to watch his game because you enjoy watching your kid play ball, great. It is completely ridiculous to hang around because your poor baby can't live without you being in his presence for an hour and a half. He would not even have to figure out what to do if he gets hurt. He has a coach for that. He could give the coach your number to call you, if there is a rain out. Or you could open your eyes to see if it is raining yourself and head back to the ball field. And, yes, he can play by himself if you are a little late. Many generations before this survived without parents being present at every single baseball practice. I think it is simply you who can't accept that your child can actually live just fine without you for an hour or two.

Wow as I read these comments I am shocked...are any of these people commenting parents? I have a 9 and 7 year old and would never leave the at a park alone. Or even my 11 year old. There are too many creepy people in this world. Thankfully nothing happened to these children but what if a stranger tried taking them in the woods...or a car. How about the dad take his kids to Walmart and LA Fitness. Be a parent and spend time with Ur kids. Hang out with them. Take Ur shower at home. Do your errands later.

Butt, and I do mean butt...........The officer would be getting an award if this was a case of the kids getting hurt in somme way.............Bottom line is that when you choose to leave your children at any age, anywhere, for any length of time.you should provide them with a means of communication.....DAH There are numerous issues that are judgement calls for officers, but there is no excuse on earth for this to occur with children!

Bottom line is, kids and parents functioned for centuries without cell phones. And since today's crime rate is at a 30-year low, what's your point?

When I was about 10, I went biking with a friend and we rode up to the elementary school about a half-mile from my house. We met some other friends who were doing tricks while riding down a hill at the school. One of them, though, caught a stump, went over the handlebars and face-planted on the pavement. He was basically knocked out and bleeding.

We didn’t have cell phones (obviously) so I rode home as fast as I could and got my mom, who came up and helped him. He was bleeding heavily from the knee and face, so she put a dish rag on his wounds. She then took him to the hospital, where he had stitches in his lips, face and knee. We were close by and had the ability to find help if needed.

Now, imagine if I had been three miles from home and separated by 4-lane highway. How would’ve I have found help? Knock on a stranger’s door? You really think a 9-year-old is going to do that? Yeah, right.

Accidents and emergencies happen. The problem the police officer found in this situation is that the kids really had no way to get help if something happened. Kids are clumsy get hurt on playgrounds. It seems reasonable to at least have a plan in case something happens. That doesn’t sound like helicopter-parenting to me.

Life is simple and people complicate it. Times have changed, and people are basically the same when it comes to doing dangerous things. The big difference is that the rules have changed and if there is a rule anywhere stating that a person should not be concerned about children and their well being, then I would love to see it. Quite the opposite; there are rules about people not being concerned about children and unfortunately this father broke the rule, like it or not.

Life is simple, we don't need complications. It is safer put there than it's been in decades. NO laws were broken. The parents' judgment should be respected. We, as citizens owe it to our fellow man to provide help when needed. But, don't help the little old lady across the street if she doesn't want to go and don't get a father arrested if you don't agree with his parenting. Arguably, having dad spend months or years and countless dollars defending his judgment will be far more harmful than your average 1000 trips alone to the park.

As a parent that lets her children go to the park together - the family bonds and sense of responsibility and independence are worth a little extra worrying. My kids? 6, 9, and 11 and the oldest usually reads instead.

I think the problem with the Free Range mentality with this story is that not all parents are built the same. The police have to deal with a lot of crappy parents. How do they know if it's a Free Range philosophy or just crumby parenting? Here's a story about a similar situation about a young child allowed to run loose at the local mall that ran on our sister Patch in Upper St. Clair... http://upperstclair.patch.com/articles/toddler-found-wandering-at-mall-twice-in-one-day

Without even reading the article the main difference is TODDLER. Nobody suggests free ranging TODDLERS at the mall. Any TODDLER seen wandering without parents is in need of assistance. It doesn't mean that the police need to be called. TODDLERS can be slippery creatures and get away from the best of us occasionally. Wrangling the TODDLER for a few minutes and attempting to find the parents should be tried first. If parents cannot be found, then you gotta do what you gotta do. But regardless, 6 and 9 year olds are NOT TODDLERS.

You know if a child needs help the same way that you know if an adult needs help. It is not as though you walk up to every adult you meet on the street and ask "do you need help?" You make decisions based on what you see. Is the child asking for your help? If yes, THEN HELP. If no, then really question whether your help is needed. Does the child look malnourished or unkept (beyond a day at the park)? Does the child look sad, lost, scared or anxious? Then you might what to strike up a conversation to feel things out like you'd hopefully do for an adult you found in those states. Or on the contrary, is the child happily playing in a park. A child who is happily playing in a park is FINE and doesn't need your help, just like an adult happily walking down the street doesn't need your help with anything at that moment. From everything read, these children were happily playing in a park until interrupted.

The chief's comments are so absurd. Maybe the kid's answers were vague because he wasn't sure how to respond to some strange woman demanding answers to personal questions. Maybe the father wasn't keeping track of the exact amount of time that he was gone, and it's entirely understandable that he'd lie in that situation anyway. You've done nothing wrong, and suddenly some power tripping moron with a gun is threatening you based on how long your kids have been alone. Id certainly say that time period was shorter than it was. Contingency plan? Is this chief 12 years old or something? Does he have no recollection about the techniques he used to survive childhood?

No, the heart of the disagreement is the inability to stay out of other people's parenting choices. Kids are entitled to be free from ABUSE. That's it. Happily playing in the park is not abusive. Kids are not entitled to be free from "crappy" because "crappy" is subjective. What you think is "crappy" may be a far cry from what I think is "crappy." I think NOT allowing a 9 year old to play alone at a park is crappy parenting. Should I call the police on every parent I see at the playground with their 9 year old? Or should I butt out and let the parent parent as they see fit even if I think that it's "crappy"? We seem to have lost the ability to just let people be. I think insecurity as parents is to blame.

And we KNOW they were healthy kids having a splendid time because everyone is silent on the issue. Not a single supporter of the police, including the police and yourself, has said that the kids were scared, unkept, malnourished, etc. That would have been the first words out of everyone who wanted to defend this action, including yourself in your articles, if that were true because nobody would support leaving miserable, malnourished kids alone in the park.

Shouldnt the writer of the story stay unbiased? Or is that not good journalism anymore?, trudging though all of the comments to defend your opinion on every single negative comment does not show professionalism or impartial. Even the wording of the story suggests slanting in favor of your personal opinion. Journalism has gone down the drain.

I wrote this on the other forum but I'm repeting it here. To all the parents that are saying the world is a safer place for children and that the number of kidnappings from strangers has been declining well don't you think maybe that is because more parents are keeping a closer eye on their kids making harder for those people to pray on them? Saying that there are fewer and fewer kidnappings from strangers is a good arugment for leaving children unattended in a public place is like if I told you fewer children where getting lead poisoning so I'm going to paint my house with lead pain. You don't hear about the 6 year old kidnapped walking home from school with their parent. The sickos are still out there in the world and leaving your young child alone in public is letting those sickos know what kids to target

Violent crime overall is down, and has been on the decline since the 60s.

Helicopter parenting is not the cause of the decline. We know this because all forms of violent crime are declining, including adult-adult crimes.

Of course, any kidnapping of any child is not acceptable, but these are vanishingly rare occurrences. If we truly responded to the risks we are likely to encounter, we'd happily let our children walk alone, but we'd never take them in our cars. There were 115 reported stranger kidnappings of children in 2011, this about equals the number of children that were killed or catastrophically injured playing football last year. 6466 children died in car accidents in 2007, and that number has been increasing (2011 data were not readily available).

Yes but in addtion to the 115 there were 58,200 children kidnapped by non family members. Witch mean yes the child knew that person but that could be anything it could mean the sex affender that works in the apparent commlex the child lives in or the handy man but in all 58,315 kidnappings the kidnapper found an opening to take the child.

Also if one in five girls last year where sexually abused how can you say violent crimes are down? Even if most of those girls knew there attacker the attacker found an opening to abuse them.

Patricia: You seem to be suffering from what is known as mean world syndrome. Let me guess, you watch a lot of tv? Favorite shows include CSI?

Look at the actual statistics and determine your actual risks. I didn't even say that the 115 kidnapped children were injured (and, most of your 58,200 weren't either).

If you wanted a particular child to be kidnapped... and you left them on the street to make that possible, on average they would wait there for 750,000 years.

Why, then does the news make the world sound so scary? Because that is precisely what sells news. Nothing more, nothing less.

One in five girls was sexually abused? Why do we think that this is any different than it's always been? Acceptable? No. But, wrapping children in bubble wrap does not protect them - read "The Gift of Fear" by a well-known expert - what saves people is developing and listening to that fifth sense or intuition or whatever it is. Really, this book could really save lives and it has to do not with overprotection, but with helping people listen to and use their "gut instincts" about people and situations, in those rare instances when it is needed.

K I don't watch any tv don't even own one. I do read the news. I also grew up with a mother that worked in a large ER. I don't need the news or fake tv shows to set fare into me I know plenty of real stories from people that lived in the same city as I do. And most of those kids that are kidnapped or sexually abused are not hurt? What about mentally hurt. You sound like you suffer from it could never happen to me sydrome. Don't get me wrong my 7 year old plays in my back yard by her self but to play at the park that it across the street from my house she needs a buddy. I've said this before on here its called moderation give your kids freedoms but also don't think nothing bad can ever happen just becouse it never has before. I also think the free range children idea is a dangerous one to be selling. You and I well at lest I know I know that there are plebt of parents that will use this to neglect their children. Like the mother that left her one yr old alone in a bath tub because she was told he needed independentics and he was too much of a mama's boy.

Also to get back to this story of this man from what I've gathered he left his two young children alone in park in a very high crime neighborhood. The park is also on a 4 lane highway. Thus isn't a nice park in a nice neighborhood. I also wounder how many of the parents out there that are upset about the cops being called life in small towns or safe communitys. I live in a large city one of the most dangerous cities in my state. I've also lived in a nice small twon in NH. And I can tell you big difference between leaving your kids in a park in a residental community and a sleezy park in a crummy community .

Maybe they are dealing with a lot of the high crime but in the mist of dealing with the most likely endless amounts of crime the stept in to help these kids.

Rather than continuing to make inferences on how much crime our area has, you all are more than welcome to visit Bridgeville and Scott Township in suburban Pittsburgh to see for yourselves. We'd love to have you stay a night or two.

After reading this story, I'm wondering if maybe 13 is even too young to be left alone? http://www.wtae.com/news/30975372/detail.html

I would have gone stark-raving mad had my parents supervised me constantly after age seven or eight, much less thirteen! Not only would it not have been good for me, for my development and education, but it would have done terrible damage to my relationship with my parents.

Seems like alot of people are on the side of the Dad.....probably because nothing bad happened. What if something tragic would have happened.....then would we be reading posts about all the adults around in this park and nobody noticed these unsupervised kids? Unfortunately we live in a society today where bad things do happen to kids and a child's safety has to always be on our minds.

The preliminary hearing against Mr. Narayanasamy has been delayed twice. His hearing his now scheduled for Aug. 9. I will post a follow-up story when the magistrate decides if he should stand trial on the charges.

What ever else happens, these kids have learned two valuable lessons. First, don't trust your neighbors to be actually looking out for your welfare when they say they are looking out for your welfare. Two, don't trust your local law enforcement, because they are going to make your lives suck as they "help" you.

Scott Township police withdrew the child endangerment charges against Govindaraj Narayanasamy after he agreed to take several weeks of parenting classes. Here’s the update… http://chartiersvalley.patch.com/articles/charges-dropped-against-dad-who-left-kids-at-scott-park-to-shower

First off I don't care who you are ages 6 and 9 are WAY to young to be left alone. Two LA Fitness offers child care. The father could have easily taken them with him. WHy did the father NOT want to take his children? Were the kids acting up? Well guess what it's called being a parent!
There is no excuse to leave children that young at Scott Park

well excuse me Amanda, I have a 6 year old and I would rather have my child with me. I also would rather play at the park with my child instead of leaving them alone.