This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Can Of Worms: Is it ok to spy on your kids online?
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Lombax
And I ^&*!ing hate when people look over my shoulder when I play games / watch videos...
This. Really, this.
Or when reading books, homework etc.
Agreed. Pretty much anything of the sort.
Yup.
Post by
Squishalot
As a parent, it is
my responsibility
to know if my kids are engaged in dangerous, illegal, or irresponsible behavior. If something goes wrong with my kids, it will be MY fault, not theirs. If they download something illegally, I will pay the price. If they break something in the store, I have to pay for it. There is no perfect way to raise children, but there are generally right ways and generally wrong ways. Breathing down your kid's necks and scrutinizing their every move isn't appropriate. However, letting them grow up 'on their own in private' is equally dumb.
Good to have you around, MyTie. I think you'll probably enjoy (and have some fairly strong views on) a lot of the questions being posed.
At people talking about a child's age - if you think that a 16 yr old should get privacy, and a 13 yr old should be watched, at what point will you stop watching them? There has to be a line drawn somewhere, surely.
Post by
MyTie
At people talking about a child's age - if you think that a 16 yr old should get privacy, and a 13 yr old should be watched, at what point will you stop watching them? There has to be a line drawn somewhere, surely.
I watch my 3 year old on the toilet, because he sometimes pees on the lid (which upsets my wife), and because he doesn't know how to wipe. Additionally, there are medical supplies and toxic chemicals in the bathroom that he could consume and die.
My 13 year old doesn't get that treatment. In fact, sometimes, when she forgets to flush, I tell my wife, who then gently reminds her. There is no need for embarrassment. Further, at this point she has free use of the phone as much as she wants, and keeps a journal etc. I feel no need to listen to her calls or anything. However, she isn't computer savvy, and left on the internet unsupervised would find something grotesque in a matter of minutes. Also there is the matter of our metered internet (we live in the sticks).
When my kids are 16, I'm sure they will have use of a car, and quite a bit of freedom. By then I'll be able to trust them quite a bit more. I'll already have shown them that there are consequences to their actions, and taught them about responsibility. I expect mistakes, but that is part of life.
When a child is born, they have NO free will and NO privacy. When a child turns 18, they have ALL free will and ALL privacy. It is my goal that nothing change between 17 years and 364 days old and 18 years old. The change should have already taken place gradually over those 18 years.
However, the poll questions ask if it is 'ok' to spy on your kids. The answer is resoundingly 'yes'. Anyone who thinks otherwise has not had kids, or is doing a terrible job of raising them.
Post by
Sweetscot
I really think "spying" is either the wrong word to use or needs a definition within the poll question...because I read what MyTie writes and it sounds exactly the same as what I think until I get to However, the poll questions ask if it is 'ok' to spy on your kids. The answer is resoundingly 'yes'. Anyone who thinks otherwise has not had kids, or is doing a terrible job of raising them. which is exactly opposite what I think, but it sounds like we are defining "spying" very differently.
Regarding the lines drawn along age lines...yes there are definitely developmental milestones which should signal when a child is ready for more responsibility for themself and more freedom should be given. It's not a definite age, more a mark of maturity, but still there are things a 14-15 year old will understand and know not to do that are beyond the cognitive abilities of a 11-12 year old. It's simply basic brain development.
Right now my 1 year old has to be watched at all times...he sticks EVERYTHING in his mouth, eventually he'll get past teething and his brain will kick past the stage where he's developing texture sensitivity and he'll quit doing that and I'll feel more comfortable with him being alone for very short periods of time. It's the same thing just with far less obvious dangers.
Post by
Adamsm
I hit 'No', but I think I may have been thinking about it wrong: When I think of spying on the kids, I'm thinking of the stories and news reports we hear of the parents who investigate every single thing, no matter how small or boring, their child does. The type who forces the kid to give them their log ins so that they can check their emails to make sure they aren't doing anything 'wrong'.
I agree with the points MyTie raised though; I don't see that as spying, merely watching to make sure they are safe.
Post by
OverZealous
At people talking about a child's age - if you think that a 16 yr old should get privacy, and a 13 yr old should be watched, at what point will you stop watching them? There has to be a line drawn somewhere, surely.
There is no drawn line in my book. When you think your kid is mature enough, knows the possible risks of using the Internet, and you know s/he takes responsibility for things s/he does and does not do, I would say you
could
trust them with a lot of privacy. That isn't saying you shouldn't check up on them, because you obviously should, that they're older doesn't mean they won't do %^&* sometimes, but you need to be able to trust your children, and they need to be able to trust you. If you don't trust them, chances are they won't trust you.
Post by
gnomerdon
At people talking about a child's age - if you think that a 16 yr old should get privacy, and a 13 yr old should be watched, at what point will you stop watching them? There has to be a line drawn somewhere, surely.
There is no drawn line in my book. When you think your kid is mature enough, knows the possible risks of using the Internet, and you know s/he takes responsibility for things s/he does and does not do, I would say you
could
trust them with a lot of privacy. That isn't saying you shouldn't check up on them, because you obviously should, that they're older doesn't mean they won't do %^&* sometimes, but you need to be able to trust your children, and they need to be able to trust you. If you don't trust them, chances are they won't trust you.
Hah, my parents trusted me, yet I did every possible bad thing there was to view on the internet..... -__- triple standards ftw...
Post by
Jubilee
As others have said, it really depends on what is meant by spying. Keylogging their computer? Probably not a good thing. Telling them that since it's your house, your internet, and they are your responsibility legally and morally, that you are going to keep tabs on what they are doing until you can determine that they have matured enough to make correct and responsible decisions themselves? Exactly what I would do. I don't see any problem with it, as long as there is no false sense of privacy being given.
My parents searched mine and my brother's room for drugs/other contraband every once in a while. They weren't intrusive about it, but we knew they did it, and we knew why they did it, and we respected their right to do it.
Post by
Tartonga
The internet was not such a huge thing when I was younger. But as a point of comparison, my parents DID have me call to check in with them when I was out. They did check with my friends parents when I went to their houses, so they knew I was being supervised. They did make me leave the door to my bedroom open when I had boyfiends over. They did regulate what movies I was allowed to see until I was a teenager. If they went out of town, they would ask the neighbors to keep an eye out for any parties or anything at our house. When they found pot in my sister's room and cigarettes in her coat pocket, she got grounded. etc. etc. It's called parenting.
No offense, but I think your sister was the wild popular one between both of you. =P Even though I guess that happened way after you guys hit puberty, or at least her. And about you having to leave the door to your bedroom open for when your boyfriend stayed over, don't you think that's a bit over-protective? I mean, you were a teenager already back then, right? But you and me have to also take in account that we both live in different societies. You guys would probably find weird if I told you that I went to "pubs for minors" when I was 14 years old, and that's something commonly accepted here. There are no alcohol on these pubs though, you can't be older than 18 to enter there, and it's open since 20:00 to 23:30 hours more or less (normal pubs open at 00:00 and close at 06:00). So, I would say we are more flexible at parenting than other cultures.
While I condeed that some privacy is necessary for children, they should always be supervised when dealing with strangers and the outside world. Their parent should be responsible for keeping movies and images that are not age appropriate out of their hands. 25 years ago, a parent could accomplish this by just not buying movies they didn't approve of, not subscribing to pornographic cable channels and being with their child, or arranging for someone else to be with them, when they left the house. Now, you child can interact with all the people and material you'd want to keep them away from without leaving their room.
My parents never spied on me when I was 8-13 years old. They didn't let me do things like staying awake after certain hour (which was a rule I normally broke due me to keep playing my Gameboy at nights) or having a TV on my room (nor a computer, even though I didn't want one), but that's maybe because I was clear as water: I never used the computer we had at home and all I watched was animes at the TV before dinner. But you could blame the fact that they exposed me a lot to sports and music, the fact that I always had a gaming console (Gameboys, PlayStation 2, etc...) and the fact that I live in a private neighborhood, so I could visit my neighbor friends by myself without anything weird happening. The point is, I didn't use the computer until I turned 14 and I wasn't really exposed to anything "dangerous" back then, so I was allowed to do pretty much anything I wanted.
When I turned 14 years old, I was free as a bird, and as I already said, that was when I started using the PC. I used it to communicate at first (MSN and Fotolog), but then that's when I started discovering the internet...I don't think it was something bad to be honest. I think 14 was the ideal age to see what the internet has to offer (not taking in account children rapists though, which doesn't usually happen here and if they do, they are not related to the internet: they just kidnap you randomly and you know the rest of the story).
Anyway, what I really wanted to say, is that I wouldn't forbid my child to use the internet, but I would try to expose him to other activities before he starts getting used to it. But I understand we all don't live under the same circumstances, and for the kids that are exposed to the internet so early in life there would have to be some sort of restrictions. And to be completely honest, when I see kids playing WoW, who are younger than 12 years old, I can't help to think: "
Mmh, this little cupcake should be playing outside developing his psychomotor system instead of playing such a time-consuming non-active game
".
When I was younger, the technology wasn't around for them to keep as close an eye on me. I know it may be "rose colored glasses" syndrome, but I also don't recall having so many horrible things around when I was younger either. The worst I can remember was the "stoners" smoking pot in the parking lot before school. Now, my son says it is not even a surprise to see kids doing lines of Cocaine in the bathroom, and OxyContin and Vicodin are passed around like breath mints. We also had a much smaller circle of friends without social networking. I probably had a dozen or so people that I would have called friends, and my parents knew their parents, ect. Now, my kids have hundreds of "friends" though facebook, and I dont know more than a handful of them.
That sounds pretty grave. If I was you, I would talk with the school to notificate about the drugs. And about facebook, I think it's nothing to worry about if your kid doesn't have any important information on his profile, like your house phone number for example.
Post by
gnomerdon
I'll take extra measures if my daughter is pretty. If she's not attractive, I'll give her a bit more freedom. :( Can't believe I said this but this is my current truth. So this is how it sounds like on the outside. It's pretty bad. Okay, freedom for both gender kids online from now on.
Post by
Atik
I'll take extra measures if my daughter is pretty. If she's not attractive, I'll give her a bit more freedom. :( Can't believe I said this but this is my current truth. So this is how it sounds like on the outside. It's pretty bad. Okay, freedom for both gender kids online from now on.
1. Attractiveness is relative.
2. Why are you judging your own daughter?
3. Wow...
Post by
ElhonnaDS
@ Tartonga- You're right. My sister was more popular than I was. She was also the one who got kicked out of college for smoking pot in the dorm, who was 6 months pregnant when she got married and who is now staying home because her career as a cashier in a car wash doesn't pay enough to make day care worth it. She would sneak out of the house, and then beg me not to say anything to my parents while i bandaged up gashes in her knees and hands cause she fell off some guy's bike. She had a panic attack when she was 16 because she had been at some party where someone had stuck a needle in her arm "as a joke" and she didn't know if she now had something. We had a feud with the neighbors because she decided to stick gum on their cars, and they wanted her to pay for it (my mother actually didn't believe them on that one, but my sister admitted it to me later). And through it all, she was the most amazing straight-faced liar you had ever seen in your life.
I love my sister, but the choices she's made have definitely had an effect on her life. She never wanted to be told what to do, never wanted to be supervised and thought she always knew better than our parents. My parents were able to keep her somewhat in check when she was younger- for every one incident where she got away with it, there were about 4 where she got caught, or prevented. After she left for college she made some interesting decisions She's matured a lot since then, but she's not going to get back things she lost the opportuinty to have as a result of poor decision making.
My point is she had some close calls when she was younger. If my parents hadn't been vigilant, many of those things she'd been prevented from doing could have been much worse. Most parents would rather have their children learn through being taught, and being punished by them, rather than being punished by the law, being expelled from school or being fired for failing a drug test, because it doesn't go on their permanent record, or affect their future opportunities. You can try to teach your kids to do right, but you can't guarantee that they will unless you're watching them. That's your job as a parent- to watch them.
When you're 12, 13, 16- you don't think your parents know what they're talking about. You're too smart to be caught by some weird stranger, drugs have absolutely no real affect on your life, you'll never be the girl who gets pregnant, you aren't worried about the future enough to worry about lung cancer. It goes in one ear and out the other, and most of the time you don't realize how much your parents were trying to help you until much further down the road.
Post by
Lombax
When you're 12, 13, 16- you don't think your parents know what they're talking about. You're too smart to be caught by some weird stranger, drugs have absolutely no real affect on your life, you'll never be the girl who gets pregnant, you aren't worried about the future enough to worry about lung cancer. It goes in one ear and out the other, and most of the time you don't realize how much your parents were trying to help you until much further down the road.
This isn't true in all cases, while some of these are true for me most are not, I would never do drugs nor smoke and I realize all the !@#$ that's happening in the world, then again I'm getting really asocial because I can't stand the stupidity that exist in this world and that makes me from the rest.
I can understand why my parents trust me, I'm more mature then almost all my friends.
And OT: Spying like watching your kids e-mail and the alike isn't ok, supervising them is though.
Post by
Azazel
I'll take extra measures if my daughter is pretty. If she's not attractive, I'll give her a bit more freedom. :( Can't believe I said this but this is my current truth. So this is how it sounds like on the outside. It's pretty bad. Okay, freedom for both gender kids online from now on.
This is wrong in so many ways.
Post by
Tartonga
@ Tartonga- You're right. My sister was more popular than I was. She was also the one who got kicked out of college for smoking pot in the dorm, who was 6 months pregnant when she got married and who is now staying home because her career as a cashier in a car wash doesn't pay enough to make day care worth it. She would sneak out of the house, and then beg me not to say anything to my parents while i bandaged up gashes in her knees and hands cause she fell off some guy's bike. She had a panic attack when she was 16 because she had been at some party where someone had stuck a needle in her arm "as a joke" and she didn't know if she now had something. We had a feud with the neighbors because she decided to stick gum on their cars, and they wanted her to pay for it (my mother actually didn't believe them on that one, but my sister admitted it to me later). And through it all, she was the most amazing straight-faced liar you had ever seen in your life.
I love my sister, but the choices she's made have definitely had an effect on her life. She never wanted to be told what to do, never wanted to be supervised and thought she always knew better than our parents. My parents were able to keep her somewhat in check when she was younger- for every one incident where she got away with it, there were about 4 where she got caught, or prevented. After she left for college she made some interesting decisions She's matured a lot since then, but she's not going to get back things she lost the opportuinty to have as a result of poor decision making.
My point is she had some close calls when she was younger. If my parents hadn't been vigilant, many of those things she'd been prevented from doing could have been much worse. Most parents would rather have their children learn through being taught, and being punished by them, rather than being punished by the law, being expelled from school or being fired for failing a drug test, because it doesn't go on their permanent record, or affect their future opportunities. You can try to teach your kids to do right, but you can't guarantee that they will unless you're watching them. That's your job as a parent- to watch them.
I want to start saying that I really don't want to make you feel uncomfortable while we talk about this, so I'm sorry if you felt like that while answering to me and please let me know if you feel like that. And believe me when I tell you that I have deleted all what I wrote while responding to you several times, just because I didn't know how to start replying properly without making it any worse.
Now with what you said, your sister definitely had a tendency to rebel against your parents authority. Have you ever talked to her why she was like that? Did your parents push her a lot? Did they expect a lot from her? Because I can think of an instance where your sister couldn't bear the weight of the responsabilities that your parents put over her. Maybe she wanted to claim somebody's attention, to break the chains around her feet. What if the source to her problems was not that she wasn't protected enough but rather that she was over-protected? I mean, you described 1 side: your sister's side, but in order to make a fair judgement we would need to know how the other side was: your parents side in relation to her. Despite that you were ok with the parenting given to you, maybe it wasn't for her, or maybe even her parenting wasn't the same as yours. Is your sister older than you? I guess you and your sister had a good relationship, since she told you her secrets like the sticked gum on the neighbor's car, but she didn't tell your parents. If I had to take a guess, I would say that your opinion mattered to her more than your parents opinion, since she lied so much to your parents, but maybe she was honest with you. I would say she maybe only counted on you, because your parents couldn't understand what she wanted, what she needed. You could say she was selfish, because she only thought of herself, but what if that's what your parents unconsciously teached her? Maybe that was the only way she could find to escape from reality. Also you could have learned from her mistakes more than learning from your own. That's why you may have not followed her steps, even though maybe deep inside you always wondered how would it be like to be rebellious as her.
When you're 12, 13, 16- you don't think your parents know what they're talking about. You're too smart to be caught by some weird stranger, drugs have absolutely no real affect on your life, you'll never be the girl who gets pregnant, you aren't worried about the future enough to worry about lung cancer. It goes in one ear and out the other, and most of the time you don't realize how much your parents were trying to help you until much further down the road.
I somewhat agree with this, but I would say that at 12, 13, 16 you are curious about everything, since you don't know anything. There is a world out there to be explored, and you are just a tiny sand grain. Parents would explain to you what's the purpose of everything, but good parents would make you understand that. Good parents are the parents that know how to get along with their son. If you don't get along with them, you won't trust their advice, and hence you will try new experiences by your own, even if your parents tried as hard as possible to prevent that.
Post by
Perkocet
A parents first responsibility is to protect their kids.....period.
I have a 15 yr old, and a 10 yr old, and I have a crazy amount of surveilance in our home, including on all the computers. (It doesn't hurt that CCTV and security are what i do for a living). I have a total of 16 video cameras in and outside of our house. All the public areas of the house are covered by video, and the entire house is covered with audio. I also have keystoke loggers on every computer in the house. Now, that being said.....
I only am interested in activities or information that would be harmful to my kids. Drugs, alchohol, and violence are all I am really interested in. I dont care that my 15 year olds conversations with his girlfriend seem like they belong in Penthouse Forums, or what his friends are doing. But there are waaay to many stories about cyber-bullying, suicide, and teens doing stupid crap with drugs these days to not keep an eye on them. And the cameras are great since they know they are there, they know they cant get away with anything in or around the house, and their friends know they are there too. So far, the worst thing I have caught on video is the two of them fighting all day long while I am at work.
This is so beyond overboard it's not even funny.
OT: It depends on the child.
Post by
Squishalot
I somewhat agree with this, but I would say that at 12, 13, 16 you are curious about everything, since you don't know anything.
I disagree. As an example, I wasn't curious at all about cigarettes and smoking, because I was suitably afraid of the damage it could / would cause. Ditto with most other drugs / excessive alcohol / sleeping around / etc., and their impact on my life.
Good parents or otherwise, you're going to end up ignoring them at some point. The key question is whether that point is at an age beyond where you'd be legitimately spying on them. Why is it OK to keep an eye on them when they're 12, and not at 21?
When a child is born, they have NO free will and NO privacy. When a child turns 18, they have ALL free will and ALL privacy. It is my goal that nothing change between 17 years and 364 days old and 18 years old. The change should have already taken place gradually over those 18 years.
In relation to the above points - 'should be' is all well and good, if you find you can trust them. What if you find that you can't trust them? My girlfriend's sister is in her mid-teens and doesn't check who she's 'friending' on Facebook, puts her full address up, and has downloaded malicious software (inadvertantly) onto their network. Is it reasonable to give her privacy, just because she's older and should know better, despite the fact she doesn't?(##RESPBREAK##)8##DELIM##Squishalot##DELIM##
Post by
Tartonga
I disagree. As an example, I wasn't curious at all about cigarettes and smoking, because I was suitably afraid of the damage it could / would cause. Ditto with most other drugs / excessive alcohol / sleeping around / etc., and their impact on my life.
I disagree that you weren't curious about them before knowing they were harmful. You weren't born knowing they damage the organism, and thus somebody had to tell you about that, which I would guess, you parents did.
Good parents or otherwise, you're going to end up ignoring them at some point. The key question is whether that point is at an age beyond where you'd be legitimately spying on them. Why is it OK to keep an eye on them when they're 12, and not at 21?
Why is that a key question o_O?
Post by
Squishalot
I disagree that you weren't curious about them before knowing they were harmful. You weren't born knowing they damage the organism, and thus somebody had to tell you about that, which I would guess, you parents did.
Not really. If you're not exposed to something, how can you be curious about it?
Why is that a key question o_O?
Apologies, I changed my tense when I was writing that. The kids are going to start ignoring parents at some age or another. If they start ignoring you at age 12, and they go off and do their own thing, would you watch them and spy on them when they do? Is that any different when they're 21?
Post by
Tartonga
Not really. If you're not exposed to something, how can you be curious about it?
When I mean that at early ages kids are curious about everything, I don't mean they actually want to try everything by themselves. I mean, like they don't know what a cigarrette is, therefore they want an explanation. If you as a parent tell him that cigarrettes are noxious for the organism, you may make him understand you or, he may not trust you and see that other people smoke as well, which would make him doubts about the cigarrettes. You don't need to be exposed to anything to be curious about it, the fact to have seen it or have been told about it will make room in your mind to make you wonder what its purpose is at that age.
Apologies, I changed my tense when I was writing that. The kids are going to start ignoring parents at some age or another. If they start ignoring you at age 12, and they go off and do their own thing, would you watch them and spy on them when they do? Is that any different when they're 21?
No and no. xD
But I don't think both societies are comparable. Well, I don't know about Australia actually, but, I wouldn't spy on him, if he wants to, mmh, I don't know...go to a friend's house or something, and I wouldn't expose him to the computer early, I would try to make him live his life as I did (?).
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.