Good Idea Or An Invasion On Your Chil's Privacy?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2265583/Snoop-childs-texts-Its-bizarre-parents-treat-youngsters-internet-mobile-exchanges-private-says-PMs-childhood-guru.html

I tend to agree with Ms Claire Perry, we are not talking about having a peep in their private diary here, today's technology promps special measures.

[ummmm]

Mixed emotions on this. I generally think its an invasion of privacy.

[woofgang]

of course it depends on the age of the child but i would be amazed that parents do not keep an eye on what the child is reading and or saying to others. Children are children, their judgement and knowledge of the world is not adult and goodness knows adults do silly things!

[woofgang]

I just read the whole article, sensible woman!

[daffy654]

My sons's PC is in the lounge, he isn't allowed to take his phone upstairs or to school. He wouldn't dream of sexting or any of that stuff, I know most mums would say that but my son has Asperger's syndrome and is a pathologically private person. I would never snoop on him.

[bazwillrun]

some things i agree others I dont.

Unfortunately i dont think she knows what the phrase "tipping point" means

we reached that many years ago with the erosion of things like discipline and introducung rights for everybody and anything etc etc.

the PC brigade has sleepwalked into this and there is no going back.

The non-stop pushing and breaking of the boundaries by the "meedjia" .

sex etc is all over the place, nearly everything is sexualised or sexed up.

if I looked at my kids texts and emails etc etc , theyd soon find a way round it so its not worth it.

Being at a private board its hard to keep an eye on what they are up to any way we just just keep an eye open for any unusual behaviour when they are home every other weekend from school

From me to C. Perryr "Good luck with that !"

she hasnt got a hope in hells chance of changing anything that will make any difference.

[Gromit]

Fifty, forty, thirty, twenty years ago parents would monitor what books children were reading, where they went to and who with. I do not see this as any different.

Giving a child unfettered access to the internet is neglectful and dangerous.

[NOX]

If I had to spy on my teenage children like this I would consider that I had failed in parenting them up to that point. I'm confident that my kids would never put themselves or anyone else in danger or behave in a sufficiently stupid way as to warrant it. so far I haven't been disappointed.

[sp1814]

AOG

The problem that many parents will have (specifically parents of teenagers), is that they will they will always be one step behind.

A teenager will know exactly how to delete the browser history on their laptop. And those who have text messages they want to keep secret will download and install 'Hide My Text' (if they have an Android phone).

It's a good idea for the family laptop to be placed in the living room, or some other family communal area...but mobile phones (specifically smartphones) introduce a bigger problem.

I believe there are a number of manufacturers who sell 'locked down' mobiles for younger children which are preloaded with a set of numbers and can be used for emergencies, which seems like a good idea, because apart from calling a few friends, grandparents and mum/dad, why would a seven year old really need a phone?

[sp1814]

What I mean is that the teenagers will be one step ahead, not the parents.

[ummmm]

I agree with NOX although I have the PC in the living room and they are not allowed to take my laptop out of the room.

[woofgang]

sp, "keeping up" with your child's use of technology is a part of being a parent. Kids aren't cleverer than their parents, its become an excuse to say "oh i can't keep up"

[anotheoldgit]

sp1814

/// because apart from calling a few friends, grandparents and mum/dad, why would a seven year old really need a phone? ///

I think that that is all part of the problem, mobiles these days are very really used by the young to phone people, no it's texts, a camera and access to the internet.

Can you just imagine the kind of things that traverse the playground from one phone to another?

[anotheoldgit]

Gromit

/// Fifty, forty, thirty, twenty years ago parents would monitor what books children were reading, where they went to and who with. ///

At last I think I can safely add "Things weren't like it in my day" :0)

[youngmafbog]

Yes they did monitor and yes, we as kids, found ways around it. It is just more efficient and easier to do it now.

This does not mean parent should not monitor. If you think your child would not do anything, just watch documentaries on murderes. Most people associated never realize the killer is amongst them, they believe they are good people.

Not saying everyone's child is going to be a murderer of course jus that you really dont know and it only takes one mistake to a paedophile for it all to end in disaster.

[Gromit]

In 1976 when I was 12, I would be secretly listening to the Sex Pistols. My parents would not have aporoved, but in that instance they were wrong.

10 years earlier than that, and kids would be reading Lady Chatterley and Oz.

In 1986 it was Viz.

Youths have always seeked out such material. The problem is that now it is far easier for them to do so and the material available is far more explicit and dangerous.

[NOX]

But isn't it better to bring your kids up to be sensible responsible people who don't need babysitting at the age of 14 or 15? I would be SO disappointed if my kids needed that at such an age.

[AliceTickband]

well said gromit!

[Kromovaracun]

"
Can you just imagine the kind of things that traverse the playground from one phone to another?"

Yes, I can. I've grown up with it.

Honestly? I really don't believe that the internet has the kind of effect on kids that people think it does. I'm hugely skeptical of the scare stories that have been coarsing through the media on this matter - I remember one example last year where headline was something along the lines of 'internet porn turned my child into a sex offender.'

Much as I appreciate that parenting must be very difficult, particularly when faced with an uncertain influence such as the web, I simply do not believe these stories, and I would be willing to bet money on a large number of them being faked or at least grossly exaggerated.

Children are not the innocent, sweet, precious little things that we think they are. They are violent, manipulative, sneaky, and often quite ruthless. I'm not convinced that the kind of material that some adults would call 'shocking' actually creates anything in a child that is not already there.

I do have some sympathy with Perry's points, though, simply because I think the internet has made "grooming" by malevolent adults much, much, much easier than it was before. It's still pretty rare, don't get me wrong, but it's also much easier, and young kids aren't as savvy when it comes to social networking (e.g. in what circumstances you shouldn't agree to meet someone you met online) as older folks are.

[bazwillrun]

"They are violent, manipulative, sneaky, and often quite ruthless."

they are evolutionary traits to aid in survival, simple as that.

Survival of the fittest and all that

[sandyRoe]

The text lives of teenagers should be none of their parents business.