Should Parents be Liable?

in Reflections14 days ago

Over the last decade in Finland, I have noted how youth crime has increased significantly. In fact, it has tripled since 2015, with a sharp increase in the severity and violence involved. I have seen this playout on the streets multiple times, and I have heard plenty of first-person stories from people I trust. And from what I have read from other countries, for the most part, this is a common trend and it seems that the countries that previously had little issue with violence or crime, are seeing the sharpest rise. It is like these countries are normalising to trend in a worse direction, rather than the worse getting better.


image.png


Is that a future youth demon?

In some places at least, it is considered a crime of the parents if a minor commits a firearms offence, presumably because it is up to the parent to secure the weapon. However, I wonder what would happen if the punishment of all the crimes committed by minors that don't trigger prosecution for the minor, should be shared by the parent also. There seem to be a lot of parents who don't care where their kids are or what they are doing, but would they care more if what their kids did impacted them?

Maybe, maybe not.

There are lots of reasons for an increase in youth crime, with many of the social mechanisms that used to exist to curb antisocial behaviour severely weakened, increasing mental health issues of various kinds, potent new drugs, the internet content they consume, limited opportunity, degraded school environments and a host of other issues. Punishing the parents for the outcomes of a lot of these things is unfair, because many are out of their control also. However, there is also a lot in the parent's control too. For instance, I read stories of kids under ten years of age joyriding in stolen cars at two in the morning. Where are the parents?

And this is the issue I guess, because almost anyone can have a child, even if they have no skill or will to raise a child and have no desire to spend any of their time and energy keeping track of where and what their children are doing. Should they be punished for just being bad parents?

A slippery slope, isn't it?

I don't know what the answer is in terms of legislative avenues, but I do think that consequences for youth crime are so low for the child and the parents involved, there is very little incentive to change the behaviours. What would probably help the situation long-term is if there is a healthy social environment at home, and in society at large - but that takes time to develop and it will take longer than it did to degrade. Adults and children seem to forget that they are part of a wider fabric, which means it is constantly fraying, rather than pulling a tighter weave. Maybe we all need to be reminded that we should be intentional with all of our actions.

Do the punishments fit the crimes?

Punishment might not be a great way to change behaviour, but lack of punishment is even worse, because it reinforces the behaviour. There needs to be an incentive to act in a positive way, but there just isn't much incentive for most people these days to do so.

What is your take on this and why?

Perhaps you want to share what is happening in your local area and what is being done to improve, or worsen the situation. Many countries, regions and cities can vary a lot, so it would be interesting to hear some first-hand stories.

Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]


Be part of the Hive discussion.

  • Comment on the topics of the article, and add your perspectives and experiences.
  • Read and discuss with others who comment and build your personal network
  • Engage well with me and others and put in effort

And you may be rewarded.


Sort:  

I do agree with parents being liable as it is their responsibility to know what their children are up to and to teach them what is right and wrong. I know many broken homes tend to end up with no father figure for the kids but that is no excuse. Parents in many cases are as bad as their unruly disrespectful kids who have never been disciplined so they do whatever they want. Just because you are 14 or 15 it does not give you the right to commit crime and there needs to be consequences.

I caught a 12 year old kid who had stolen a lady's handbag and threw him over my shoulder and took him back to the lady who now had the police in attendance. People were shouting at me to let him go and he was crying and begging to be released ,but he had no chance. He was known to the cops for previous crimes and the parents should be handling this and not up to the likes of everyone else dealing with this low life.

In the old days he would have been given 6 of the best at the police station and ended up in juvenile detention if he never learned his lesson. Corporal punishment is good in some instances because these kids need to learn one way or the other. The soft soft approach is clearly failing and the being cruel to be kind could actually work in some cases.

And this is what I expect was a big difference in the past. Parents would punish their children, but would rarely actually hurt them. It was a process of action and consequence. Now, parents don't do this, either through belief systems of let their children do what they want rather than deal with the discomfort of having to actually deal with their kids. Some just have better things to do themselves, like nothing.

It shouldn't be up to citizens to protect themselves from children, should it?

I want to say just "Yes", but it is a much more complicated answer that I am not entirely sure how to articulate in depth, so here are the "dot points" of my thought on the matter:

  • Overall, yes
  • Children should, however have autonomy
  • They should not have the autonomy to harm others (be it physically or financially)
  • Is the parent to be held liable with what - fines, prison time with their little loin spawn?
  • Will it really stop it from happening again, or just drive the kid to keep doing worse things?
  • What would you do if your child did something really bad and you were held liable?

Yes, it is more complicated. I wouldn't actively campaign for this as a "yes" answer, but there should be some considerations perhaps.

What would you do if your child did something really bad and you were held liable?

Depends on what they did I guess. If they were a school shooter, or was committing home invasions, or stealing cars at 2am at 10 years of age - should take some blame?

We actually just had a bit of this with one of the recent school shootings in Michigan. They actually went after the parents and there were a lot of people who were against it. It's funny thought because they had no problem thinking charges should have been filed against the school employees.

because they had no problem thinking charges should have been filed against the school employees.

Because it is a teacher's job to stop children shooting guns at school. Didn't you know?

This all goes back to everyone wanting to blame someone when something unfortunate happens. It's honestly sad. My wife gets frustrated because she can have a feeling kids will be a problem later in life, but who is she supposed to tell and what's to guarantee they will take her seriously or even remember when the kid ends up in high school. They always point to someone and say "they should have done more", but it was still the parent that bought the kid the gun and the kid that made the decision to use it.

If we're going to hold parents responsible then they need to be in charge. All over the world parents are having their kids taken away and put into foster care for inane crap like not honouring today's chosen pronouns, letting them walk home from school, or for spanking them like literally every generation and culture before us.

There seems to be this real disconnect at the moment; a push to hold people responsible for things which are outside of their control, like the violence against women narrative. I can't watch the TV for 10 mins without being told that all men are responsible for cultivating a society full of violence against women.
Huh? How am I in charge? Did I miss an invitation to come in and consult on policy?

If we're going to hold parents responsible then they need to be in charge.

Oh I agree. A lot of the laws to "protect children" have hamstrung parents from doing their job. Spanking is a big one for me - an incredibly small percentage of parents would hurt their children by spanking, yet to protect against those who would, all lost the ability. The irony is, those that would, don't care about the law.

The only way you are responsible Matt, is over your own actions and by extension, that of your children. which brings back to the conversation of liability. If a 15 year old boy rapes a girl, should the parents of the boy pay a cost?

"Rape" meaning she changed her mind afterwards? "Rape" because she was enthusiastic before, during and after but she's also 15 and so can never consent?
Again, the state contaminates everything it touches, including the parents' authority and therefore responsibility, and also what constitutes a crime and even what words mean.
If a man only gets to see his kids every second weekend; how much liability should he be exposed to, for their actions?
A parent seeing a child start to go off the rails would be incentivised to distance themselves and limit their personal, legal liability.
Feels like there'd be some nasty unintended consequences down that path, so I'd say no.

Parents should be liable. As lack of education and ethics comes directly from them. The situation in Bangladesh is dire. In most cities teenage gangs have become the primary tool to hire to do nasty things. Even they are engaging more in murders also!

As lack of education and ethics comes directly from them.

And what about the parents not being educated properly earlier themselves? My understanding is that in Bangladesh, there are a lot of very poor also. Does that impact on this?

Yes, it is a chain reaction who knows for how much longer will it go on! Moreover, corruption is in her all veins, it is hard for anyone to remain honest.

I voted "no," but with caveats.

On one hand, pet owners are liable for what their pets do, especially in cases like dog attacks. Young children are not pets, but parents are their stewards as they learn right from wrong, and I would say the parents would be on the hook for things like stolen goods.

On the other hand, by their teen years, those kids know theft and violence are wrong and have a significant degree of autonomy even though they are not legally independent yet, and have personal responsibility for their actions. They also have the ability to deliberately circumvent protective measures. locks can be picked and electronics hacked. This is deliberate action. Parents can do their best to secure dangerous objects and reach morality but rebellion and/or sociopathy are beyond their control in the end, making punishment of the parents misguided even if we do want someone to pay.

Yeah, I get it. I think that if something like this was ever the case, there would be types of activities that would be grouped into various categories.

I wonder if parents would rat on their children if they suspected they were engaging in criminal activities to avoid fines or punishment?

I think that parenting and the relationship with parents can shed light on what to do and what not to do when exercising education and discipline towards our children.

Unfortunately, cruel treatment, over-demanding and abuse have become normalized here in my country, which can undoubtedly trigger psychological damage.

It is up to us to take charge as adults to solve the emotional problems, which many carry as children, nothing anywhere in the world justifies violence, offenses, rapes, anything that harms society.

We have to be very firm when raising our children so that at least they are versioned as good human beings. I am a grandmother and I have the experience of raising my children and now I see the discipline, love, respect of my children with my grandchildren.

Unfortunately, cruel treatment, over-demanding and abuse have become normalized here in my country, which can undoubtedly trigger psychological damage.

I thin "too soft" treatment is also a type of abuse, as it leaves kids without the tools to deal with the realities of life. A good home is not one where the kids get whatever they want.

Without a doubt, I agree with you, there is no conscious parenting without an emotionally present adult.

Many mothers and fathers who want to do well in their parenting role look for that balance in the education of their children, not as bland as you say, Mr. Tarazkp, not as strong.

Fundamentally, raising is not only caring, it is leaving footprints. And these traces are recorded with who we are, with what we heal, with what we manage to manage our own emotions.

I have said it many times: a child learns more from how we treat ourselves, than from what we try to teach him with words.

I believe that responsibility lies both with parents, for failing to adequately control their kids's behavior and teach them the basic rules of coexistence in society, and with the kids themselves, as they cannot be exempt from blame.

But if no action is taken, the problem will only get worse. When I was a kid, my parents knew exactly where I was, what I was doing, and who I was with at all times. Because they knew that if I got into trouble, it would affect them in one way or another. That's the kind of responsibility all parents should have toward their kids. It is a complex issue and each country tends to approach it differently, but this is my opinion on the matter.

Kids shouldn't be exempt from blame either imo. In some places, children are working jobs. I don't agree they should, but it does point to their capabilities, doesn't it? Western world, children seem to be maturing later and later, with 30 year old people still living like 18 year olds.

That's exactly what I mean; the fault lies with both parents and kids. Now, it would be another thing to ask who is more to blame between the two; and that would be a matter of debate depending on the country in question. In my opinion, although the blame falls on the kids as well; parents have the greater responsibility in this, because they are the ones who should control the behavior and actions of their kids. But if there is no way to force parents to be more responsible with their kids, then all the weight of the law and responsibility should fall directly on the kids. The bad thing is that the kids protection agencies and others come out to over-defend them no matter what like totally innocent victims.

All this happens because in many countries it is wrongly taken for granted that human beings do not have personal judgment and the capacity to discern what is good or bad as such until they reach the age of majority. Therefore, it is only until then that they are held accountable before the law. In my opinion, herein lies the problem. The whole problem lies in the legal framework of the country we are talking about, from there will depend on the approach they give to the problem.

I'm going for yes, with how many parents these days let their child in front of the monitor all day instead of actually spending time with their children (I know of some parents whose children know how to use smartphones before they even learn ABC). Because if they do, parents may be able to notice the change in their child's behavior better, though I also understand that there may be other circumstances why parents can't spend more time with their child, even if they want to, such as with their finances. So, if parents are punished, children also need to be punished, being the culprit, otherwise, they would not know that they did something wrong. But then, if they became like that because of their family situation, I do not know if they will stop doing wrong things unless something changes in their family otherwise.

(I know of some parents whose children know how to use smartphones before they even learn ABC)

It is so common now. That definitely wasn't the case with my daughter :)

So, if parents are punished, children also need to be punished, being the culprit, otherwise, they would not know that they did something wrong.

And there is also the risk that kids will do it to punish their parents.

It is so common now. That definitely wasn't the case with my daughter :)

I know. It's in the blockchain :), and I also know of people who are very hands-on in taking care of their children.

And there is also the risk that kids will do it to punish their parents.

Maybe it's the only thing that the kid knows to get their parents' attention, but if they continue to be ignored, it may turn to kids getting revenge.

Recently, a parent spied on their 23 years daughter to know if she has any relationship...to their surprise, the young girl was involved in prostitution. She confess that she gets in to this line of business to fulfil her needs to live a high class life in the affluent society....in this case whome to blame - the parents or the girl or the society ?

In many cases the society too involved in making kids spoiled. Regular bullying, neglecting, and other factor too leads to adverse consequences.

Isn't it strange that parents are spying on their 23 year old daughter? This is obviously a cultural thing there, but it does point to a lack of trust and communication breakdown in both directions, doesn't it?

Spying was an uusual things , not every patents does that, call it their intutuin or thinking of l an orthodox family who does not want their kids to make any relationship outside. They are more into arranged marriage kind of sentiments... the outcome was mlre surprising where the girl is carried away with the societal pressure.

Not only in Finland but also in Sri Lanka, a South Asian country, there are many youth crimes happening. It is a matter of regret that these crimes are committed by those who are not mature in life, especially those between the ages of 14 and 24. It is a serious tragedy that young children from families with better social acceptance are tempted to commit these crimes than young people who join society through bad family environments. Since children are tempted to commit these crimes after entering society and not at home, parents cannot be blamed 100%. Children are mostly with teachers and fellow students during school and extracurricular hours. Therefore, they should also bear some responsibility for this wave of crimes.

Nowadays, many parents are busy with their jobs and do not have the opportunity to check on their children during the day. Therefore, children feel that they have lost love and go on wrong paths to gain other acceptance in society and destroy their lives. Many young children in the city where I live are addicted to the drug ice for this very reason. Therefore, parents should show proper care and love to their children. The most serious thing is that if parents do not allow their children to buy ice drugs, they will not hesitate to kill their mother or father.

In this time, the wave of crime has also increased due to the misuse of the Internet. The decline in values ​​is severely seen today, and religious education is also declining in our country. Even governments do not intervene properly to curb these crimes. Although it is really difficult to expect a good environment in society, a good environment should be created for children at home and all values ​​should be carefully explained to them. In addition, even what children say should be listened to clearly. Good communication is a reason to reduce crimes.

Is 24 a youth? Not that long ago, that was mid-life territory in most countries. People were married with children at that age.

Nowadays, many parents are busy with their jobs and do not have the opportunity to check on their children during the day. Therefore, children feel that they have lost love and go on wrong paths to gain other acceptance in society and destroy their lives.

This is part of a larger social problem, isn't it? The world has degraded families into money-making units, rather than social parts of the community to improve the future.

As technology becomes more widespread over the years, we expect crime rates to decline. However, the opportunities that come with technology are causing young people to commit crimes. Synthetic drugs directly hijack young people's minds, turning them into criminals. They harm themselves and those around them. I believe the solution is harsh punishment. A lesser penalty for a first offense and a more severe penalty for a repeat offense can deter recidivism.

Technology offers solutions in the future, but it also creates a dystopia of government oversight at the granular level.

The west has become way too tolerant on crime. If there are no harsh consequences, it will only get worse.

The Western society has moved away from community, so there is little social pressure to be a positive part of the world. Harsh penalties don't change the social fabric in a positive way either. Lots and lots of issues....

I think the increase in youth crime definitely brings up the issue of whether parents should be held responsible. Parents have a vital part in forming their kids' values and actions; if they neglect this responsibility, there could be some repercussions.

Yet at the same time, parents are under pressures to do a lot of things they didn't feel they needed to do earlier - like the work environment. Plus, they don't have the same mechanisms to affect behaviour as earlier in most places (like Finland), such as smacking a kid.

Yes, I think parents should and need to be liable and accountable for their children. and I didn't know it was so bad.. TRIPLED!

yeah tripled. Crazy in ten years.

I agree with most in saying "yes", but it's a slippery slope. Kids need agency and be able to try things out and live for themselves, but there's gotta be a limit to what they can do without "punishment".

I must say yes.

From the beginning, i decided to say 'yes' to make them liable. As i have passed my teenage and stepped into adulthood just a few years ago so I know the role of parents, how does it work. So from my point of view and experiences, parents are liable too.

Poll closed! The votes are in and it's time to see how your community weighed in.

The top-voted choice is Yes with 11 accounts voting for it.

It's a complicated matter. I do imagine a scenario where a teenager, in an excess of "not-thinking-straight-ness", being pissed at one or both of their parents and knowing they would be liable for their child's actions, would give the teenager the push over the edge to commit something potentially awful to punish them. In this case, parent liability would fuel the bad behavior tendencies of certain children.