Recently I announced big news – Baby #2 is on its way, we’ve bought a house, sold our condos, and we’re moving to the suburbs. Among the plethora of reasons for this move are a few key points: More space, private yard, and safety. When discussing this with my childless friends the other day I found that I had to justify these points, which seemed so clear to me.
“Suburbs are just as dangerous, there are still jerks living out there.”
“Suburbs are so boring, I started smoking because I was bored and there wasn’t anything else to do.”
“I grew up in the city and I’m fine…”
I’ve discussed baby-proofing in the past and how it’s impossible to find everything that could pose a problem, but I often find myself running around like Alex in Claire’s Dad’s cabin (from that terrible movie Final Destination), trying to find anything that could kill the Wee Baby T. K on the other hand wants T to explore and learn and she sometimes feels like my attempts to protect him are limiting his growth. I’m not saying she’s wrong, I just don’t want to make a trip to the hospital because he wanted to see how scissors worked (just an example, she doesn’t let him play with scissors). I feel like this is a great metaphor for the urban v. suburban debate.
So where is the line? How do you determine what your little one should be playing with and how much of the world they should experience at what age? In my opinion I’d rather keep him sheltered from the world forever, sadly I know that’s not possible.
Good luck out there.