Skip to main content

The Globe and Mail

Let the kids run wild – it’s better for them

Ben Quinnan, right, and two other students start a round of the "messenger bag relay race" during St. Charles Elementary School's annual "ThinkStretch" celebration, Friday, Sept. 12, 2014. Children permitted to play outdoors on their own or with friends are getting more physical activity than kids who are constantly supervised, a new Canadian study suggests.

Jeff Schrier/The Associated Press

Children permitted to play outdoors on their own or with friends are getting more physical activity than kids who are constantly supervised, a new Canadian study suggests.

Study lead author Raktim Mitra of Toronto's Ryerson University said researchers wanted to explore the impact on kids' physical health if they were given freedom to explore places within their neighbourhoods without adult supervision.

Researchers analyzed data from a survey of more than 1,000 parents and caregivers of Grades 5 and 6 students at 16 public elementary schools across Toronto, including those located in both low-income and affluent areas, as well as in urban and suburban neighbourhoods. Kids had to wear an activity measurement unit known as an accelerometer for seven days.

Story continues below advertisement

About 35 per cent of parents or caregivers reported that they never allow kids to go out on their own or with friends. Only 16 per cent said they either frequently or always permitted kids to travel on their own independently.

Mitra said researchers found that kids who were allowed at least some time to go out and explore on their own or with friends were between 14 and 19 per cent more physically active than kids who were always supervised.

"Hypothetically speaking, when children are out on their own or with friends, that kind of creates opportunities for them to walk more or go to places or participate in spontaneous play times, which contributes to their overall amount of physical activity," said Mitra, a professor in the School of Urban and Regional Planning at Ryerson.

Guidelines recommend that Canadian kids and youth get 60 minutes of moderate to vigorous activity daily. Walking quickly, skating and bike riding are examples of moderate activities, while running, basketball and soccer are examples of vigorous activities.

However, in the most recent physical activity report card released by Active Healthy Kids Canada, only 7 per cent of five- to 11-year-olds and 4 per cent of 12- to 17-year-olds were meeting those targets.

Mitra co-authored the study with Guy Faulkner and Ron Buliung from the University of Toronto and Michelle Stone of Dalhousie University in Halifax. The paper was funded by the Heart and Stroke Foundation and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and published in the December issue of the journal Urban Studies.

Kids' fitness expert Mark Tremblay said the findings are consistent with other research that finds children in playgrounds tend to be more active when their parents aren't around. And while adults may have good intentions in protecting kids from potential injury or harm, there's no evidence that such danger has changed over time, he noted.

Story continues below advertisement

"If anything, it's probably been reduced," said Tremblay, director of Healthy Active Living and Obesity Research Group at the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Institute.

"It's sort of an irony that in an attempt to be the best generation of parents ever that there's emerging evidence that the behaviour of the parents is one that's actually going to accelerate physical problems with their kids in the long run."

Tremblay said the reasonable approach to allowing kids to have more freedom is for parents to begin to permit a bit more roaming distance or independent mobility, either on their own or with friends.

Report an error
Comments

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

If your comment doesn't appear immediately it has been sent to a member of our moderation team for review

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading…

Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.