To tacitly blame parents who grant freedoms to children places us in the same camp as those who vilified Lenore Skenazy in New York. Six years ago, she let her 9-year-old ride the New York subway alone. She was subsequently decried as "America's worst mum".
In a long list of subsequent cases, Maryland parents Danielle and Alexander Meitiv are accused of trusting their kids, aged 10 and 6, to walk home from the park. They got only halfway home before someone called the police.
Do we want to succumb to the paranoia reflected in these cases? Or do we want to insist that Auckland becomes a more child-friendly city? The former is the easy route. Fear is readily adopted, especially when spurred on by comments from trusted public figures such as the police. The tougher task is to work towards a child-friendly city. To do so risks being accused of being unrealistic. Yet any city that focuses only on roads, rates and rubbish risks losing its soul.
A more child-friendly city is a slower city that promotes walking and public transport. A child-friendly city benefits everyone. In our research, children persistently say they want a city with less traffic. Children are natural walkers until it is driven out of them by parental paranoia. Being chauffeured may alleviate parental anxieties and prevent relatively rare and tragic accidents. But persistent chauffeuring interferes with children's environmental learning, reduces physical activity and robs them of independence.
Children may not yet be taxpayers but they are citizens. It is time to listen to their views before deeming their independent travel "unacceptable".
Robin Kearns is professor of geography at the University of Auckland.