The Sun-Herald

If only we could leash the adults

I'm bemused about all the fuss from parents over Clover Moore's proposals to fence off children's playgrounds in off-leash dog parks. I wish there were more fenced off parks for both kids and my dog.

Why? Any extra safety barrier between the small and vulnerable and an outside world increasingly fraught with dangers strikes me as sheer good sense.
Perhaps not as many Aussies as Brits have the tragic tale of two-year-old James Bulger permanently seared onto their consciousness. I do. I worked on the story of the murdered toddler when I was a cadet news reporter in the UK. What remains with me most about the abduction and brutal killing of the child - apart from the stomach-churning details of his demise - is how quickly and easily he was taken from his mother in a public place. She let go of her boy's hand and was distracted for about a minute - perhaps less. It was enough time for his killers to spirit him away. They were in the middle of a suburban shopping mall.
Every time I walk through my local park and see a toddler wobbling towards the road, disappearing behind trees or attempting to scale the low sea wall while mum or dad chats on the phone, drinks wine with friends or works out on the fitness station, I think of James. I thought of him the other day when a distraught little girl wandering alone in the same park asked me: 'where's mummy?' Mummy was moving the car to avoid a parking ticket. Dad was at the other end of the park with their other child, riding bikes.
I wish it weren't so, but any of those children could be the next James. Predators and perils lurk in the safest-looking, most respectable places. Surely an enclosed area set aside for kids and their parents can only be a useful facility?
After James' murder there was a huge resurgence in the use of child restraints. My mother couldn't understand why they ever went away. She says mine saved my naughty little hide on numerous occasions when I was struck by the urge to run into traffic or topple something huge and heavy onto myself.
But today, people appear reluctant to acknowledge that toddlers are serially inclined towards self-destructive acts (and disappearing ones, too). Parents want their kids to roam free and run wild and it would be wonderful if we lived in a world where they could, but sadly we don't.
As for the dogs, I usually keep mine on his leash in non-fenced parks for the very same reason littlies should be on theirs. While he adores children and other dogs, I know I cannot always protect him from a combination of his native predilections and the ignorance of adults. Given the chance, he will of course delve into a carelessly discarded garbage bag and eat something harmful, sniff a syringe out of curiosity or wander too close to one of Sydney's unpredictable park 'characters.' He's a dog with dog behaviour, which means if I want to fulfill my duty to care for him properly in a rough old world, his liberty will inevitably be compromised. Same with kids.
Neither are equipped to be responsible for their own safety; that's our job. Children at least have one advantage over their canine contemporaries: they eventually grow into adults entitled to wander wherever they want (unless they're Tibetan - and I'll be returning to that subject next week). Until then, I reckon fences and restraints are a small price to pay for the security and wellbeing of those we are entrusted to protect.
In the heat of their turf war, the fenced-park opponents have overlooked this simple fact. Fences mean safety for both dogs and kids and unless you can find a way to leash the grown-up, human threat outside those barriers, they should be considered an asset.