Parents Chain Daughter to Bed to Keep Her From Dating Married Man
Yeek. I don’t think anyone here would advocate what these folks did was proper, so feel free to lock 'em up. :mad: The biggest problem I have (AFTER the chaining part, natch) is that the girl is 21, which I’m assuming is definitely the age of emancipation in California (if not 18).
Still, a few questions pop in my mind, so I’m curious on how other Dopers (calling all parents!) feel about this:
-
What are the legal/ethical/moral limits of what protective behavior a parent can take to protect their child?
-
How bad does a child’s behavior have to get before any “extreme” action can be taken?
Well, let us first remember that this story takes place in California. I seem to recall a story in which a 51-year-old man sued to have his parents provide for him, stating that they were legally responsible for their children essentially until death. I recall it being discussed here at length, but can’t find a link to it.
**1) What are the legal/ethical/moral limits of what protective behavior a parent can take to protect their child? **
I don’t think this question can be answered in any meaningful way without discussing the circumstances. Say a truck is heading straight for the child, I may be excused if I do a flying tackle that breaks one of his arms. OTOH, say my 16 year old daughter is going on a date with a guy I don’t like. I probably wouldn’t be excused for the same behavior.
2) How bad does a child’s behavior have to get before any “extreme” action can be taken?
What is ‘extreme action’? I mean, certainly I can never drown my childred to protect them from Satan. I don’t think there are many circumstances in which I can legitimately cut off one of their limbs. Probably not too many where I can punch them dead in the face.
BUT
There may be circumstances under which ‘extreme action’ is necessary. I think it must depend on the specific circumstances of each situation.