Parental_Responsibility

THE FAILING OF THE PARENTS

But he's my baby...

First, I will be the first to admit that since I don't have any children, my views on this topic are a little harsh.

The offspring of parents are, by the laws of the land, generally exempt from most minor criminal transgressions until they reach an age of accountability. This age varies based on the crime and the mental capabilities of the child. As most people are aware, once a child reaches 18, any previous criminal record is sealed, thereby giving the 'newborn' adult a fresh start in life. Society almost expects minor brushes with the law during the formative years, however, on that magic date when the sun rises on the beginning of the 18th year, all automatic forgiveness ceases and minor brushes with the law will haunt someone for the rest of their life.

Forgive me for asking, but how stupid is that? Yes, I know there are cutoff ages for things like voting (in which only the adults are well informed) and drinking / smoking (which only adults are capable of recognizing their limits and stopping), however, the first problem to be resolved is the sealing of records for criminal activity prior to age 18. What is true in the past will likely be true in the future. Let's start by giving everyone, at any age, the same benefit. Most state traffic laws issue points for various traffic offenses and the accumulation of points to a specific level can cause suspension of the driving license. However, the slate is wiped clean after 3 years (or whatever is the limit for your state). In other words, the state believes that if you are not caught violating traffic laws for 3 years then you have reformed and deserve a fresh start. Use the same logic in terms of prior criminal behavior. Liberals believe in giving ex-convicts a second chance and yet, even if a man reforms and lives alaw abiding life, he will always be dogged by his criminal record. Assign time frames to criminal activities and if someone cleans up his act, reforms his life, walks the straight and narrow, etc, then after sufficient time, his record would be sealed. Either that or leave the records of the children intact for life, the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

I got off the topic, intentionally, but off the topic nonetheless. Compared to the 'olden days', children today have an explosive set of distractions and opportunities that were unimagined just 30 years ago. However, then as well as today, the supposed controlling, guiding and formulating factor in a child's life was the parent. If you give a pig and a boy everything they want, you get a good pig and a bad boy (I just love old sayings). So what happens when the parents fail? In some cases the child will move forward with dogged determination to become the best that can be while in other cases, the child will seek to experience the limits of independence and non-conformity. Some children recognize that the benefits of society are earned while other children think that those benefits should be bestowed on them. If you think through the results of these mental attitudes you can reach a conclusion as to which child will turn out as a positive force for mankind and which will not.

The worst part of the whole thing is that the way a child turns out is a result of the molding provided by the parents. I pick on parents that allow their 'gifted' children allowances because they appear to be just stupid, not enlightened, stupid. An example may help, while dining in a nice restaurant, a couple sat next to us with their little bundle of joy. This little bundle of joy was provided with a plate of plain spaghetti (I assume because it is easier to clean up than something with a sauce). After picking at the spaghetti and demanding rolls and more drink, the child proceeded to climb on the window frames, run around and ended up throwing the spaghetti in all directions (luckily, the child was not athletically gifted). During this entire display, a warning hand or voice was never raised to the child because these parents were enlightened and believed that child development was enhanced with freedom of expression. I wanted to 'freedom of expression' the parents upside the head. The point of this discussion is that parents must either be held responsible for the actions of the child or they should hand the responsibility off to someone that will be responsible. The lack of action of these parents and the exhibited action of the child ruined the quiet, intimate dinner that my wife and I were having and the yet there is no way to make the parents pay for this intrusion.

So, let's assume that the child goes off the deep end and causes hurt and damage to others. Who is responsible? Where can victims turn for compensation? Now it gets sticky. Failure to control the actions of the child should make the parents responsible. This is where the real test of responsibility lies. When a child breaks the law or causes damage or hurt to others because the parents failed to monitor and control the child, the parents must bear the punishment, in as much as the child. This punishment should go beyond simply financial restitution. If you want to stop the problem from spreading then make sure parents understand that there are punishments doled out to the parents as well and the child. Let's start with something simple and work our way up. Assume a child spray paints a wall with graffiti. Not only is the child arrested, and processed through the legal system, but the parents should also be arrested and forced to bear the same humiliation that the child bears in being processed through the legal system including staying in jail (okay, maybe only one of the parents). In addition, the parents and the child must be forced to develop a means of restitution, either cleaning the paint off and restoring the wall or financial payment. Either way, if the parents are impacted by the actions of the child then there is a much better chance that control will be exhibited in the future. This same approach can be applied to every level of crime with the child in jail constantly and the parent permitted to leave for a work program.

Parents appear to be trying to find ways to distance themselves from the responsibility for the actions of the children. Imagine a parent explaining that the violence on TV is causing disruptive behavior. There are two basic problems with this explanation: 1) the parent failed to monitor what the child was watching on TV (no PBS here), and 2) the parent failed to discuss the TV program with the child to explain the difference between reality and TV. The parents failed to act in the role of parents. The latest in the ads against drugs says that parents asking children who what when and where is the anti-drug. DUH! Children need control and discipline during the formative years to develop respect for others, respect for authority and honor in themselves. Yes, I know that one should question authority, however, failure to develop respect for authority will result in children that refuse to listen to parents under any circumstances. Children require discipline and they will get it from the parents or the police.

The children involved in the Columbine incident have placed their parents in an unimaginable position. Lawsuits are going after the assets of the parents. This is a good precedent but needs the force of law. The future of society is setting on the shoulders of the children and they need a stronger character foundation to stand on.