Would it have been a major inconvenience to you if you would have come home when you said you would (as a minor child) or at least given a truthful explanation as to why you couldn’t when/if that happened? Were your parents not open to discourse with you?
See…if they did try to engage you on that level (which is “having a conversation about adult behavior”) and you rebelled against that, than the problem was yours, not theirs.
YMMV, I don’t know your situation, etc, et al…
Yogsooth, do try reading for comprehension, because (sigh :rolleyes:), once again, I was not in the habit of searching my daughter’s stuff. In fact, I can only think of one time, and I was right to do it, since she was missing and all. I said only that I reserve the right, and if you think that makes me an asshole and a horrible parent, well… how’s that arrested adolescence working out for you?
Every one of you whose post has included “When I have kids” can fuck right off, frankly. Hopefully when you have kids, you’ll outgrow this ridiculous notion that they’re “right” to privacy supersedes your ***responsibility ***to *parent *them, and parenting isn’t always warm and fuzzy, kids.
What? I didn’t get that memo! Its all been pink clouds, fuzzy bunny slippers, unicorns and rainbows for me!
When I didn’t come home like I should have, I was in grade school. I said that at that time, I deserved it. I should have been yelled at, grounded, etc.
However, when I was older, I expected to have more freedoms as I haven’t been missing curfew regularly for a few years. If I did miss it, I would usually call and let them know what’s going on.
I shouldn’t have, and wasn’t, engaged on when I was a minor kid. But their behavior should have changed along with mine when I got older.
No, you do not have the right. They did not choose to be born, you chose it for them. While that’s not something that can be helped, what you can do is respect that since you made the decision of life for them, you guys did not exactly sign contracts to agree on the terms of your responsibility. What you call responsibility is you imposing your beliefs on them, unnecessarily. That one time she was missing, yeah, go ahead and search. But at no other time should have been able to do that because she gave you no reason to worry
So you’re just retarded then. Okey dokey, good to know.
Missed the edit.
Honestly, I can’t even think of a more ridiculous, whiny, entitled, thoroughly ***juvenile ***argument than “I didn’t ask to be born, you know!!!111!!!1!” Tough shit, nobody did. That doesn’t mean that children should be allowed to do whatever they want so that we don’t burden them with any “unnecessary” boundaries and guidance.
Yeah, well YOU’RE NOT THE BOSS OF ME!! <SLAM>
Young Turnip, you get back here NOW, or I WILL roast and mash your little ass. DO NOT TEST ME, CHILD!!!
And the ever-popular “I HATE YOU!!”
That’s it, I’m joining the circus!
I think that the problem here is that people are being absolutists on what is of necessity a balancing question. Bricker attempted to state that early on, but got taken out of context.
A child has a reasonable expectation of privacy, which in ordinary circumstances a parent should honor, varying with the child’s age and level of maturity. That expectation is trumped in extraordinary circumstances by the parent’s custodial rights, whereby the state holds him or her responsible for the child’s actions. Contrast, as extremes, a 13-year-old doing well in school, no behavioral problems, etc., receiving a phone call from a friend. A parent eavesdropping on that call without reasonable cause for concern is invading the child’s privacy. Now contrast this with a similar-aged kid suspected of getting involved with gang activities, doing drugs, etc. At that point, parental monitoring may well be indicated. – within reason, and with some expectation of privacy on a varying scale. The autonomy of a law-abiding adult is absolute; until custody laws are changed, that of a minor child, not so much. Parental responsibility and parental authority go hand in hand – abdicating one is abdicating the other. But the goal should be to produce a responsible, law-abiding adult, and the level of freedom and privacy should be gradually increased as the child matures, all other things being equal.
“YOU’RE NOT MY REAL FATHER!!!”
I haven’t actually heard that one yet, despite it being true in my case.
My fiance (who was adopted) told me that he used it once, when he was 16, in a huge blow-out fight with his dad. It was one of those heat-of-the-moment explosions, and he felt bad about it afterwards. It’s not even that he and his folks got along so splendidly - they weren’t on speaking terms for a couple years - but the “not my real dad” line is “fighting dirty.”
Perhaps it speaks volumes that my stepson has never used this line, but my wife has (“he’s not yours”).
That’s just something obsessive, overbearing, and controlling adults like to say. None of us asked to be born, that’s a fact. So when you decide to force someone into this world, then it’s your job to treat that person right even if he doesn’t necessarily agree with you. The shittiest argument you’re using here is basically “I’m your parent” and “Because I said so”. Yeah, try getting away with that anywhere else. You’re lucky you can bully your kids around when they’re young and defenseless, just hope it doesn’t bite you in the ass when you’re old and feeble.
Try getting away with “I need five dollars, and for you to sign my report card. Now treat me like a grownup, dammit!!!” anywhere else, sugar. 
While I don’t make the claim that I am a parenting expert, I did raise 3 children to adulthood. Most of it was done as a single father, since my wife left us when they were all still in grade school.
My rules were simple. Their room was their room, not mine. They could decorate it however they wanted, hang whatever they wanted to on the walls, whatever. I would not snoop, spy or interfere in any way as long as the room was kept reasonably neat, (bed made, no dirty clothes on the floor, vacuumed every now and then) and as long as there weren’t any other major problems (behavioral, grades in school falling, refusal to do chores, ignoring curfew, etc.)
That being said, I believe that, as a parent, I have a duty to my children. Kids are young, inexperienced with life, impulsive, and generally don’t have the ability to realize that they might be headed down the wrong road. It is my responsibility, as a father, to do everything that I can to keep them on the right road. That means that if (and only if) I suspect something is going on, then you can bet your ass that I am going to snoop, spy, search their room, or do whatever else that is in my power to find out what’s going on, so that I can address the problem. I love my kids, and would lay my life on the line for them. I want them to succeed in everything that they do. I want them to be happy, and well adjusted to life. That is my main goal in life. If I had given my kids an “exclusive right to privacy,” I would have been neglecting my duties as a father.
All 3 of my children were, for the most part, well behaved. Except for a few occurrences, I never found it necessary to go through their rooms. But the few times that I did, I did end up finding out something that they were trying to hide from me. And I did use that information that I had to address the problem. I think my kids are better off because of it than they would have been otherwise.
So did I do the right thing by occasionally searching their rooms when I suspected something was up? I really don’t know. Maybe there was another way to handle it. I do know that if, given the exact same circumstances again, I would do exactly the same thing again.
Hmm lets see.
Because I am the Squad Leader worked.
Because I am the Platoon Commander worked.
Because I am the shift manager worked.
Because I am the Manager worked.
Because I am the co-founder worked.
Wow - in every one of these instances not only did I have the title, I also had the legal authority and responsibility. Just like when I am a parent.
When I am old and feeble, I will be fine. When I am mentally not longer in charge, the kids are welcome to do whatever I they like - and they know it (running joke).
I am the adult with ownership of the house, ownership of the items, and the one legally allowed to sign a contract. The kids are not adults. If they do something bad, I am held responsible by the law. With that responsibility - I must make sure that risks are kept to a minimum. If that means going through the boy’s bedroom everyone now and then - fine. It is all within certain boundaries, but at the end of the day the parents are the ones responsible. You can not be responsible without information, and sometimes that means gathering additional data.
YogSosoth, Maybe I missed you saying so upthread somewhere, but I am curious about something. Do you have any children?
Pathetic strawman. They stopped having parental signatures for report cards at 7th grade where I am. Tell a 17 year old that they should still be treated like an incompetent criminal with random searches and the “right” to snoop. I hope that “kid” defends his privacy as I did from this intrusion
As far as I know, you can quit being at the boot and heel of all of those figures, or you agreed to being signed up in the case of the military. Kids do not have the right to quit being their parents’ slaves. And no, the handful of children who have been legally emancipated do not count
I’ve never said you can’t search their rooms, but I do not subscribe to an unimpeded right of search. Your kids should be given their privacy until such time as they give you reason to suspect them of something. Of course some parent’s criteria for suspicious behavior will vary, but no, I do not agree with unilaterally declaring that parents have the right to worm their way into their kids’ lives for no reason. Being a kid is not good enough reason to warrant this kind of unjustified intrusion.
No I do not. But if you’re going to say that automatically disqualifies me in taking a stance in this topic, you’d be wrong. I don’t have to have kids to know how to take care of one. Hell, I used to be a kid, and with hindsight, I can know exactly what I need. Plus, being a parent gives one no magical knowledge in being a good one. Plenty of people who are parents shouldn’t be, and plenty of people who don’t have kids would make great parents. I simply reject the unabashed abuse of authority that DianaG is claiming she has.
Parents don’t have right to do anything to their kids other than keep keep them alive, clothed, and sheltered. Trading one of those things for privacy is an abuse of power. Imagine if a parent said that she wont’ give their kids food unless they let them search their room. That would be wrong, just as wrong as saying a parent has a right to search the kid’s room without cause.