Is leaving young children home alone tecnically described as neglect or at risk or is there another term?

Question

Ths is not an emotive question - I would like the official description of this act not more pro Mc propoganda.

Susan: I'm trying to discover if there is an official term for this - I appreciate we all feel strongly one way or another but I was trying to get to the bare bones on the official stance.

Answer 1

Leaving young children home alone can be described as neglect, at risk as well as irresponsible parenting.

I add "irresponsible" to make a further distinction to the act wherein the parent is guilty of irresponsible behaviour with no intent to harm. In no way, does this justify, or lighten the act of leaving the child home alone...its just a one more angle wherein the parent never meant to neglect or put one's child at risk but did so unwittingly.

Answer 2

According to the NSPCC site "The law does not set a minimum age at which children can be left alone. However, it is an offence to leave a child alone when doing so puts him or her at risk."

EDIT - jc I was responding to the question only. I would also class a child who isn't nurtured, cared for, loved, or is abused and physically not looked after as being neglected, but it wasn't the question.

Answer 3

try it if you are not a doctor, try it if you don't have access to the Pope and see how fast you lose your children; it is never about protecting the innocent children and it should be; it is always about money, power and prestige and the heck with whether or not the remaining children could be put at harm again; at least Brittany Spears has to have counseling with her ex and individually, parenting classes etc but then she hasn't left them alone while having dinner and then lost one child; I would saying losing a child was definitely putting them all at risk, neglect, negligent, and irresponsible

Answer 4

skidoo, I was told this by a policeman who is a family friend. As long as a child isnt left in danger then there isnt a legal age.

Answer 5

Maybe reckless endangerment.