Are we protecting our children too much?

Personally, I'd say yes, unequivocally yes.

I was 13 before my parents let me go to the park without an adult, I lived NEXT TO the park.
When I spent weekends with my nan however, I'd go out with my friends from the age of about 10/11 and we spent months building ourselves a brilliant den. It was in the trees and on a really steep, dusty slope so we all kept slipping and got scratched to pieces from the brambles. It was this that led to me and my 13 year old friend having the idea of digging out a flat path so we wouldn't slide down, so off we hopped, climbed out of the den, onto the garages and then jumped off the garage roof, ran to get a spade and a broom then clambered back and made the path.The act of getting injured, helped us to develop problem solving skills so we could prevent ourselves getting hurt later on.

I've noticed a similar "nanny state" while helping out at cubs, every week we have a couple of parents help on a rotation basis. This week we went for a walk and there was one helper and one leader in charge of each 6 (I was in charge of blue six with a parent helper), I noticed however, that that helper I was with kept straying from the six to go and check on her son, she was a CLASSIC example of a helicopter parent, and was technically leaving a child in charge of 6 other children, completely disregarding their safety and having no trust in the leaders in charge of her son's six.
The boy in question happens to be mildly autistic, however, I was completely unaware of this until this week because it is impossible to tell at meetings without his mother tailing him, it was not until this week that he displayed social withdrawal from the rest of the group, and I fully believe that this was because his mother was holding him back, she was causing a problem rather than preventing one, which she was obviously trying to do. This boy is fascinated by fire, as became apparent when we had a campfire later in the evening, but he observed the line drawn on the ground that cubs were not allowed to cross and sat contently on his log, that is until his mother came along and started telling him to stand further back because he could get hurt, this poor boy could not understand why he had to stand further back than everyone else, it wasn't fair and he thought his mother was punishing him for something. If his mother had not been there, there would have been no problems and everyone would have gone home happy, but instead this boy went home upset because his mother hadn't allowed him to toast his own marshmallow, because she did not trust that he understood when his hand was too hot.

This is NOT what scouting is about - clingy

This is - Independence

Another issue is all these adverts for "antibacterial products" that kill 99.9% of all bacteria - surely this will just result in useless immunity and therefore, in later life, death could result from something as simple as the common cold because the immune system just can't produce antibodies to fight infection because it's never been exposed to infection before, in essence, trying to protect children from getting ill could lead to premature death, and it would be the fault of the parents.
This is pretty basic biology, so why are we falling for the claims that we will be healthier if we use antibacterial soap, we're quite clearly going to be exceptionally UNhealthy.

"Fight germs, Stay healthy" Really...?!

"A baby must be exposed to germs during its first year in order to develop the antibodies needed to fight infection later in life" - Dr. Levy, who has long been active with the Alliance for the Prudent Use of Antibiotics (APUA), spoke of an Italian study that found that exposure to bacteria is essential for development of an infant’s immune system. (http://www.naturalchildmagazine.com/news/case_against_antibacterial_soap.htm)


And here's and excellent post about knives and scouting: http://www.100yearknives.com/scout-knives/kids-love-knives/