If your mother had no cause to suspect anything was up and was snooping only to be nosy then I agree she was wrong. I am not saying snooping on your teens should be used as a way of keeping up on what’s going on in their lives. Open communication can never be replaced. What I do think, however, is that if your teen is telling you everything is fine and dandy and yet you smell alcohol on their breath, their grades are dropping and their new best friends are named “Mother Killer” and “Puppy Kicker” (no offense to anyone named “Mother Killer” or “Puppy Kicker” of course) then as a parent you have a right to snoop through their things in order to find out the truth. For the sole purpose of helping your teen get back on track.
Jawofech
As a teenager I feel I have to respond to this thread with a story of my own. Recently I became aware to the world of drugs, alcohol, and partying. It began at the beginning of the summer of '00 with cigarettes, and progressed to alcohol and to marijuana within a few weeks. I got caught at a friends house with some whiskey. My parents made a big deal out of it for a week or so and then everything was back to normal. I quit drinking. However I did not stop smoking weed. On occasion I would have small amounts in my possession, and sometimes I would smoke with friends when they slept over. My mom was almost positive that someone had it on them when people slept over, as the room would smell or there were green particles of something in an Altoids container. She would always ask me if anyone had anything, and I would just play innocent (“what is this “marijuana” you speak of?”) Nothing came of it, and I continued through October.
One day I came home from school, went into my room and immediately knew that someone had been through it. There was no open drawers or misplaced items but I just knew she was in there. I became enraged that she would do something like this, and it caused an argument. She did not find the pipe or the 1.5 grams of marijuana I had hidden behind my dresser.
Fast forward to November 11 when three cops knocked on my door. They told my parents they thought I was a drug dealer that was selling at school and asked for permission to search my room. They got it and found both the pipe and bag of weed. They then proceeded to grill me on who I got it from, where the rest of the stash was, whether or not I had Ecstacy, etc. I didn’t tell them anything they wanted to hear. I don’t know where they got their information from, but it was wrong on so many levels. My guess is that someone knew I smoked and hated me enough to narc to the cops, but I digress.
My point is that I feel that parents should definitely search if they feel the need to before the law gets involved. I feel that if they would have found the stuff before the cops showed up I could have thumbed my nose at them and sent them on their merry way. Yes, I think that parents should be involved with their kids and search their rooms if they suspect anything.
In response to the person who posted that the parents should call the Police to have them search “just to make sure everything is okay” I strongly disagree. If the police find anything illegal (marijuana, ecstacy, gun, etc) they WILL arrest the child and bring them up on charges. Don’t think the cops will just find it and not do anything about it! Not to mention the complete destruction of any relationship between children and their parents. I’m sorry but good God that’s a horrible suggestion! Imagine coming home as a teenager and finding POLICE going through your room!
stormy652:
I believe you’re referring to me, and there seems to be a misunderstanding… what I meant was that a parent shouldn’t search his kid’s room “just to make sure everything is okay” because he’d be outraged if the police tried to do the same thing to his home.
I’m a strong believer in Simon’s “entitlement system”. There are certainly some times when a parent is justified in searching his kid’s room - just like there are some times when the police are justified in searching the parent’s house.
Saint Zero:
Do you let your landlord make surprise inspections of your home?
You are not equating children with lease holders, are you? Children have no rights and freedoms in your house but what you as a parent give them (abuse and neglect notwithstanding). As an adult leaseholder, you are bound by the terms of your lease, and the landlord is bound by law to give you certain rights to privacy. There are no such laws for your children.
Unless you both sign a lease…
What a scary thought. Children are not property.
Scary? Do you disagree with this concept? What’s scary is the thoguht that children have freedoms that trump a parents’ limitations. Again, we’re not talking about anything that constitutes neglect or abuse, we are talking about parental duties and responsibilities toward their children, like setting bedtime at a reasonable hour, eating dinner before getting desert, not riding a skeeter without a hemet. Not doing drugs or bringing them into the house…
I’m curious what rights you think children have (abuse and neglect notwithstanding) that supercede anything that a parent might permit or deny.
While I am certainly not advocating a third reich in anyone’s home, parents are obligated to put limits on their children in the name of health and safety, while at the same time providing love and care, being firm and just, and instilling values and setting guidelines for conduct and morality.
I attended a parenting class once where the child psych said to us in no uncertain terms: You must set limits on your children. They need to and want to be told “no”.
The way you phrase this excludes the middle. A parent who violates a child’s fundamental rights necessarily commits abuse or neglect of that child. So I think really your question amounts to a question as to how “abuse” and “neglect” should be defined.
I don’t have a problem with reasonable discipline and the reasoned setting of limits. However, parents who set arbitrary or seemingly arbitrary rules, or who exercise dominion over their children for the sheer reason that they can, are abusing the parent-child relationship.
Do you think that a parent should be able to dictate that a child be required to leave the bathroom door open while using the bathroom? Should a parent be able to dictate a time limit for how long a child can be in the bathroom?
You are right, of course. This might fall into the “third reich” clause of my last post, and your reference to “dominion” implies that as well. But, being reasonable, we do not require our children to leave the bathroom door open, but they must not lock it (they are 6 and 8).
Getting back to the OP and snooping: like others who have posted, we reserve the right to enter the children’s rooms (we have a 14 yr old also, who is allowed to lock the bathroom door) under no uncertain terms, and they know this (after all ,we have to put folded clothes away). What we have accomplished without ever having to snoop is place this thought in their heads: this is their house, and I better not do anything bad because they will know.
Quick view on the subject, from yours truly.
I would rather lose the trust of a child in the present by inspecting his or her room. Why? Simple. Because someday, that child may have a better chance of respecting me for watching out for his or her welfare with the occasional intrusive intervention.
Parents likely snoop through a child’s room because they sense something is up with that child.
Why not risk the transgression to ensure a future for your progeny? For each affirmative answer, there will be a disagreement.
In essence, If I have suspicion, I’ll intervene. I doubt I’d hold an official inspection, because THAT would create some serious dissent. I’m likely smarter, craftier, and more experienced with covert operations than my child. I’ll take a look, and leave everything like I found it. Whether or not I tighten the reins is up to the kid.
If I find a playboy under the mattress, I might make sure to buy an extra jar of vaseline, and see how long it takes to disappear, chuckling to myself all the while. If I find a bag of pot, of course I would levy a restricting factor. Duh.
Anyway, what I’m saying is that I think that it is INCREDIBLY foolish to allow a suspicion to go unchecked. That’s how tragedy occurs.
In some cases, yes. When I was in high school, I went over to a classmate’s house to work on a project. Her mother kept a timer on the vanity, and when time was up, my classmate had to get out of the bathroom. If she still needed to be in there, she had to count aloud. Turns out she was bulimic, y’see, and the timer and the counting were designed to keep her from vomiting. But this falls under “health and safety”. I’m not saying I advocate it unless there’s a reason to do this.
My personal feeling is that it depends on what might be found. If my kid ended up showing signs of drug and/or alcohol abuse, that would be handled differently than if I suspected my kid were having sex. The entire point isn’t to punish, it’s to intervene where intervention is necessary. And I think there should be probable cause. Just because he “might” be doing something is no reason to actually snoop.
Robin
[slight hijack]
My son said yesterday…“Didn’t I just take a bath last week?” 
[/slight hijack]
On the snooping issue: I think privacy is earned. My boys are still young but we talk about “earning” things all of the time. Their toys and possessions are a privilege and as such can be taken away. Privacy follows along the same lines. You want trust and privacy then earn it.
On the one hand, I’d rather be accused of “snooping” than let any problems go unattended.
On the other hand, you can totally mess up your relationship with a child if you snoop without good motivation. So basically, I’m in favor of snooping – IF there’s substantial reason to suspect wrongdoing.
Here’s an example. My mother – who loves me dearly – one insisted that if I should ever develop an attraction for somone, I must tell her. Her argument? “As your mother, I’m supposed to be your best friend, so there should be no secrets from me. You have to promise to tell me if you’re ever interested in a girl.”
My mother is a very caring woman, but boy! That was certainly a case of abusing a relationship.
She also once demanded that I tell her who my best friend was interested in. Why? No reason. She just wanted to know. She also assured me that she’d never tell anyone that I had betrayed his confidence.
Wrath:
So you believe the right to privacy comes from legislature? If he weren’t prohibited by law, you wouldn’t mind the landlord coming in once in a while to make sure everything’s shipshape?
I was basically a good kid growing up. I got a little rowdy and drank some in high school. Didn’t hang out with the goody-goodies, nor the thugs. My parents did not search my room (they would search the car). I didn’t do pot at the time, and never kept alcohol undrinken. They did not enter it unless it got just too messy. I was the kind of kid that if they did, I would make their life miserable, even if I took them down with me. Snoop through my room? Ok, what if I just lose my english assignment, or take a bat and knock a hole in the wall (I did that once). Really, I was no more psycho than the average kid. I was mostly well behaved in high school (jr. high was different). I was just adamant about my privacy. Of course, my older sister was much worse, which made them mellower toward me. My sister likes to rib me by now by saying, “at least I never spent the night in jail.” Got caught with a beer in the parking lot of a high school stadium.
Looking through a diary has to be the worst offense. What do these idiots want? For the kid to not write? The older a kid gets the more freedom you must give, or they will claim it anyway.
Of course I mind. My right to privacy as an adult is ensured by legislature. That’s why I sign a lease. There are no leases for a child to sign; they are bound by the laws you as a parent set forth. Period.
Honey, we have to talk… we apparently do disagree about this, but I won’t post anything here. We shall discuss this later.
And we do have wonderful children. 
What do y’all think about saying to your kid if you think something’s up, “Now we’re going to go into your room and you’re going to show me everything’s OK”? That is, let the kid know you think something’s wrong, and take a look with them there.
Realistic? Better than snooping when the kid’s not home? Not?
My mom never snooped (or if she did, she was really good at it ) and I don’t think people should. Kids need some privacy too. 'Course, I never had anything to hide. I was a disgustingly good girl.
Wrath:
OK, so you do believe that you have a right to privacy only because it’s ensured by law. If the applicable laws were repealed, you would have no objection to the police or your landlord conducting random searches. Am I correct?
I disagree. I believe that some rights are inherent, and the law simply reiterates them. If the law is changed, the right stays the same. Violating that right may become legal, but it’s still immoral. Privacy is one of those rights.
genie:
Might be better than snooping without telling them, but still essentially the same. Potentially worse, in fact: maybe you’re looking through Junior’s room for drugs, and you come across something else: porn, condoms, personal letters, etc. You might have ordinarily ignored it, but since he’s right there with you, he’s going to be humiliated and it’ll be an issue. Even if you don’t find what you were looking for, he’ll come away worse.