Kirstie Allsopp was right to let her teen son go interrailing

Television presenter Kirstie Allsopp made headlines this week after she was contacted by social services about her parenting. Apparently, someone had made a referral and a file had been opened on her. So what form of ‘abuse’ was Allsopp accused of? How did she ‘neglect’ her children to such an extent that the authorities got involved? All she did was let her 15-year-old son travel around Europe by interrail during the summer with a friend.

Clearly, this was not something Allsopp had tried to hide. In fact, she posted on X about how proud she was of her son for doing the whole trip by himself, noting how important it is to let kids be independent. She tagged US academic Jonathan Haidt and author Lenore Skenazy, both popular advocates of the ‘free range’ approach to raising children.

In a time when teenagers are brought up under constant parental supervision, Allsopp’s post predictably generated a huge discussion on social media about whether her son was too young for the trip. She expected that to be the end of it. But then, in a sinister twist, a social worker from her local council, the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, contacted her after receiving a referral. In an interview with the Daily Mail, she described how the council wanted to know what ‘safeguards’ were put in place while he was on holiday. She was also warned that a file would be kept open on her family, in case any other complaints were lodged.

Allsopp was, understandably, outraged by this absurd state overreach. ‘I just felt sick’, she told the Mail. ‘It was just so extraordinary. I was in a parallel universe where they were actually taking this seriously.’

The whole situation is indeed deeply troubling. Why would a government employee feel compelled to intrude so gratuitously into a private family situation, seemingly just because it generated some mild online controversy? Especially given that the boy in question, Oscar Andersen, was just about to turn 16, when he would legally be able to leave home if he wanted to.

This fuss over a 15-year-old’s interrailing holiday shows just how little freedom children have these days. This is particularly true in comparison with their parents, who pretty much roamed free in the Seventies and Eighties. This is precisely why Haidt’s most recent book, The Anxious Generation, is resonating so much with a newer generation of parents. It argues that a combination of helicopter parenting and endless smartphone use is causing huge distress to youngsters as they grow up.

Inspired by his ideas, Sunday Times chief interviewer Decca Aitkenhead recently wrote about how she made her teenage boys go without their mobile phones for long periods of time. She also let her 14-year-old son go on a camping trip on his own with some friends, which they loved. They even claimed not to have missed their phones at all.

It might be that phones are not so much the problem for youngsters as the lack of freedom they now enjoy. Perhaps instead of age-restricting or banning smartphones, as some have suggested, we should allow children to explore the world outside their screens.

Our adolescent years tend to be when we are the most open to new experiences. Developmental psychologist Alison Gopnik has written extensively about how vital play and exploration is for the growth and development of children and teenagers. In her book, The Gardener and the Carpenter, she writes that adolescence is a time when humans have an extraordinary appetite for risk and experimentation. Taking such risks is a natural part of the transition from childhood to adulthood. What all this suggests is that there is a cost to overprotecting children. By not allowing them to have formative experiences with their peers, parents and wider society are stunting their growth and development.

The wisdom gleaned from our ‘coming of age’ experiences has been endlessly documented in iconic literature over the centuries, such as in Alcott’s Little Women or Dickens’s Great Expectations. This is apparently something we’ve only recently forgotten. There was a Nineties nostalgia meme that did the rounds on social media a few years ago. It pictured a pile of BMX bikes left on a suburban driveway with the caption: ‘Before mobile phones and Facebook, this is how we knew where our friends were.’ It was a scene even a millennial like me instantly recognised from my early teenage years. Mobile phones were on the market at that time, but they were pretty basic. They were mainly used for calling, texting and playing Snake.

Back then, our friends didn’t always know exactly where we were, and neither did our parents. For most of the weekend and holidays, teenagers were off the parental radar. It felt completely natural for us to enjoy that kind of freedom. Only now, as an adult and mother myself, do I realise how much letting go our parents had to do. They were likely very aware that we weren’t always completely honest about who we were with and what we were up to.

While our families may have worried about us when we were gone, we didn’t think about them that much at all. We relished the time on our own. It was all part of growing up. There is nothing neglectful or irresponsible about giving children the freedom to do that. In fact, I dare say it would be more dangerous not to.

Candice Holdsworth is a writer. Visit her website here.