Recently on Facebook a friend's comment brought up (in my mind) the topic of a child's right to privacy. Now, the situation for this friend was somewhat different, but it made me think about what was a reasonable expectation of privacy for dependent children. Is it right or wrong for a parent to transgress the privacy of their children? Is it wise or unwise? (A different question.) The response you'll normally hear is "Don't do it!" Both kids and adults will say that it's their space, that you shouldn't violate it, that "trust is important" and other wise-sounding things. According to UNICEF, "Children have a right to privacy." Common perception is that we ought not violate their privacy. The common perception is that they should have the same reasonable expectation of privacy as any adult. My question: Is that true?
How does a parent balance concerns for the safety and welfare of their children with their children's desire for privacy? Under what circumstances is it acceptable/advisable to invade their privacy and under what circumstances is it not? How does a parent balance their own culpability (parents are legally liable for illegal items in the home, for instance) with their children's desire for privacy? Is it okay to monitor the Internet use of a teen or read their emails or monitor their texts or calls? Are the tracking devices being marketed today for parents to keep tabs on their kids an unwarranted invasion of privacy? Are there rules to follow, steps to take to do it right?
I can see arguments on both sides. I easily don't fall in the category of "Never violate their privacy", but I can see the pitfalls of completely disregarding their privacy. How does one strike the proper balance? I'm just wondering.
6 comments:
It's a good question with no easy answers, seems to this parent. It's a balancing act, I'd say.
I'd disagree that they have the SAME reasonable expectation of privacy as any adult, but a similar one, perhaps.
When our youngest daughter started doing thing that made me suspicious I followed up by putting keystroke copiers on the computers and recording phone conversations. I even used Bluetooth to remotely download her cell phone pictures to my computer once.
The information I gathered in a few short months was enough to know she needed help. She was only 13, getting into booze, drugs and sex.
We got her the help she needed (against her will at the time obviously - 13 year-olds always know what's best for them more than we do!) Today she is almost 19 and thanks to the 2 year program her and the entire family went through she is alive and responsible and making great choices about her life. And we have a great trust relationship now.
So I'm all for invading that privacy - IF - there is probable cause. And I think as parents, we get to decide what that probable cause is. As far as the law goes, I don't what it actually says about this sort of thing. Nor do I really care. It's the law, remember that says a 14 year-old child can get an abortion without the parent's consent. Kinda hard to have much respect for laws when they do stuff like that. If I obeyed the law about tapping and recording phone conversations of my 13 year old, maybe she'd be dead today. My home, my property, I pay the phone bill. I make the rules. What is in the best interest of my family is my top priority.
It is a mix, and varies depending on the kids and how they handle responsibility. We let our kids have Facebook accounts provided they add us as friends.
I would never let any computers in the house be without Internet filters (we use Bsafe Online). To do otherwise -- especially with boys -- would be like cramming stacks of p*rn in an unlocked closet and suggesting that the kids probably shouldn't go in there.
We don't monitor their text messages or emails but would if we thought there was a serious safety issue at hand.
We also teach that electronic messages are forever and to be careful what they write anywhere. We've been very fortunate with their behavior so far.
Their reasonable expectation of privacy goes only as far as their reasonable actions dictate it should. We have always given our kids their privacy, but the underlying rule was that they have no "right" to anything not given to them by us, their parents. What goes on in our house is our concern always. Their bedrooms are spaces WE give them to have their own little world and that world will remain unviolated by our prying eyes as long as they endow us with the confidence that they deserve that privacy. Once they've shown they can't handle the resonsibility, they lose the "right" to privacy. UNICEF can kiss my ass.
Stan,
If you want a real shock check out the UN Convention for the Rights of a Child. In short, this is a treaty that many nations have already signed that gives the authority for children's rights to the UN. For many nations this isn't a big problem because they don't give a rip about the UN (see Iran sanctions as example 1). But for the US, any treaty that is signed supercedes even our own Constitution. So, if signed by any US President the UN could send blue hats to any door and force parents to comply with international laws (not US laws) or face removal of the child from the home.
There is a measure working its way through the House and Senate called the Parental Rights Amendment which would counteract the passage of this CRC treaty before it gets started. The link to the PRA site is below. There are lots of critical issues today, but this is one of the most important it seems to me.
http://www.parentalrights.org
The UN is scary like that. I did a post not too long ago on the UN's Human Rights declaration. Now, someone, please, remind me again why we have something like the UN?
Post a Comment