There’s a vast difference between spouses voluntarily sharing their location with each other for practical reasons or children voluntarily sharing their location for safety reasons, and tracking your kids or wanting them to constantly “check in” with their parents.
Personal reasoning O/T and hidden so nobody needs to be offended.
The level of helicopter parenting these days is staggering. As a kid, growing up in an urban area in the 70s, we would be out and about for hours. No tracking, no calling in, nothing. We were told how far we could go and when to be back home. Done. And we grew up just fine. In spite of much less safe vehicles (well, give US truck evolution another 5 years and a modern truck will be less safe for the child it hits than in the 70s) and all the tales of razor blades in halloween candy and mass abduction (I remember learning a special anti-kidnapping scream even in high school – yes, it was that crazy back then).
But with this approach we did learn from the start about being reliable, about commitment and how to take responsibility for ourselves and for our friends. What my parents did back in the 70s (eg. leaving a 12-year old with his younger brother alone at home for 2 hrs) would today be outright illegal in the State of CA – ironic that actual child neglect cases in the same state of CA have increased dramatically since. Of course back then we also sent criminals to jail, somehow we cannot find it in ourselves to do that anymore these days, so I guess you could argue we have added hazards for our kids that way.
Go to a baseball field and even during practice there’s more adults there than kids. Constant surveillance, not to mention interference. Kids have to be driven in gargantuan urban assault cruisers to school just a half mile away so parents can reassure each other that “traffic is so dangerous” — well duh, your speeding 4-ton mini tank tends to do that. School outings require a half dozen waiver forms and there about as many chaperones coming along as there are children. When my wife and I are out running, smaller children will see us and often start running too only to immediately be reprimanded by their parents with “don’t run” – this is on a peds-only hiking trail in fairly flat land with no crossing traffic. Well hallelujah for the 70-lb 5-year old diabetic.
This zealous overprotection and pampering (which BTW appears primarily a problem in the US and the UK, other EU countries seem to be a lot more reasonable here) treats children like they’re dumb, handicapped, and needy. Problem is, you treat people like they’re dumb and they become dumb. You tell them they are unable and they will become unable.
And make no mistake, all this helicoptering has left a mark on our kids. I have undergrads come to my lab as summer interns who casually mention their parents do their finances for them. WTH? These are 20-something kids at our nation’s premier public university that are extremely bright, best of their high schools, and yet, they still have to learn to balance their own checkbook. When they need to sign a lease, they say they need mommy’s help (for some reason it’s never daddy). Mommy should have taught you about that stuff years ago, now she can’t cut the cord. I guess that makes her feel important and great, but it has turned you into a cretin. Condolences. /rant
Umm, so pardon me while I put away that soap box…
Anyway, yes, a very healthy dose of skepticism is IMHO warranted when it comes to surveillance of children and all the pampering, coddling, and styrofoam packaging that tends to come along with that. Of course a tech corp like Apple will focus on potential benefits, no matter how few or feeble, but it’s quite obvious that them successfully creating broad artificial demand will end up serving their best financial interest. I’m quite doubtful though it equally serves that of our children and future generations of children.