The Surveillance of Children's Mobility.

Abstract

The increased protection of children by monitoring them is said to be a central characteristic of modern childhood. In the field of mobility, this aspect of modern childhood is reflected in the fact that children's everyday mobility is to a great extent kept under surveillance, e.g. by parents, kindergarten or school employees and through general traffic regulation. In this article, we investigate the surveillance of children's mobility -primarily bicycling, walking and car usage -from three different angles. In the first, we investigate the general power relations in mobile practice that add to the surveillance and restriction of children's mobility. In the second, we illustrate how parents monitor children's mobility by chauffeuring them. In the third, we look into how parents remote control children's mobility by means of behavioural restrictions and technology. By using statistical material and qualitative interviews, we illustrate how parents perceive and perform their own surveillance of children's mobility. In addition, we comment on how children perceive their monitored mobility and how they cope with it. Finally, we reflect on the differences in parental mobile monitoring and relate this to welfare and socio-economic structures in the families. Rationalities in contemporary mobilityThis article contributes to the expanding field of the sociology of mobility and it highlights the mobility related norms, practices and perspectives of a very distinct group, namely that of families. It elaborates on children's and parents' views on traffic and mobility from a surveillance perspective and includes insights from the new childhood paradigm within the sociology of childhood (James, 1998; Prout and James, 1990). In spite of the fact that children's mobility accounts for around 20% of the daily travelling population in the EU (EU, 2000), children's perspectives are often left out in the general mobility oriented sociological literature (for instance in Bauman, 2000; Beckman, 2001b;Castells, 1996;Jensen, 2001;Scheller, 2002;Shove, 2002;Urry, 2000).Even though mankind has always been mobile, the quintessential aspect in contemporary societies is that the consequences of mobility thoroughly influence our daily lives, local, national and global politics, as well as our environments and the welfare of human beings. Political and scientific discussions are often focussed on the environmental side effects of increased car-use. Welfare aspects of how mobility influence and shape people's every day life and how side

Er boligområderne i børnehøjde? - om mobiliteter, forbindelser og (udendørs) liv

“…Tid og rum er i Lefebvres teori en ontologisk medproduceret dimension, som for eksempel finder sted i hverdagslivets mobile praksisser. De mobilitetsmuligheder, som for eksempel børn tilbydes, er praeget af blandt andet foraeldres af og til omfattende formaninger (Fotel & Thomsen 2004), men også af de rationaler som ligger i blandt andet byplanlaegningen. Hos Lefebvre får vi en gennemgående politisk opfordring til at basere rummets produktion på en heterogenitet og en fleksibilitet, der med perspektiver fra "det levede rum", skaber en demokratisk modificering af "kapitalistisk" praegede byer (Lefebvre fx 1996;1991).…”

Attendance System Using NFC Technology with Embedded Camera on Mobile Device

“…New technology has made it possible to monitor children by e.g.. Their cellular phones, and some parents use that deliberately of where they can go independently. Monitoring children's movements from a distance seems to provide some parents with a feeling of control and thus seems to ease their risk worries, even though parents' opportunities to save the child from any danger are limited [11]. Fotel and Thomsen [11] state that even though monitoring the mobility of children is often done with a caring rationality, it can transform into a control, which in some cases, the child does not benefit from.…”

“…Children beginning school in Finland travel to school largely independently, either on foot, by bicycle, or bus. A Danish survey by Fotel and Thomsen [11] states that parents' supervision of children's mobility is bound up with different aspects of their travel conditions, such as the choice of mode of transport. Driving a child, for instance, clearly supports the physical supervision of children's mobility, whereas bicycling or walking can be performed by the child on his/her own and thus leaves room for unmonitored movement.…”

“…For example, increasing links between home and school then how we clear it when children are often active in resisting such transfer information [5]? Denmark is traditionally presented as a country where children are able to freely move around and have independent quality of moving freely to schools and leisure facilities [11], and Finland can be considered similar to Denmark when it comes to children's mobility. Children beginning school in Finland travel to school largely independently, either on foot, by bicycle, or bus.…”

“…While statistics show a reduction in the number of road accidents involving children during the past decades, Danish parents report an increase in their concerns about their children's road safety [12]. Ontop of monitoring children's mobility through escorting them by car or other traffic modes, some Danish parents also monitor their children's mobility from a distance [11]. New technology has made it possible to monitor children by e.g.. Their cellular phones, and some parents use that deliberately of where they can go independently.…”