When are parents gonna start raising their own kids?(44 Posts)
Now, i'm not gonna lie, i'm a 20 year old and not a parent but i have some questions i want some answers for.
First i am sick of reading in the news parents wanting this that and the other done on the internet to help protect their kids. I understand we need to help protect kids but why do most parents expect others to do it for them. You always read that they want facebook to change this or google to add this, why can't you raise your own children, there are more than enough child filters out there, both server side and client side. Why aren't you buying one of these filters and installing it instead of expecting other people to filter it for you?
Second thing annoying me is video games. Everytime there is a new violent video game or shooting in a country the blame always points to the video game industry. Now i own an xbox and in 30 seconds you can set a parental filter to only allow your child to play games they are old enough for. I have read other posts on this forum about Black ops and people are saying i think 13, 14, 15 is old enough to play it...NO, the game is rated 18, unless your child is 18 they should not be playing it. I am sick of being on xbox live and having to listen to some high pitched kid playing an 18 rated game, why can't parents seem to follow this very simple LAW?
So in general why are parents always looking at others to blame for thier own failings in raising their children?
I also agree with this post :D
The problem is with games is if they don't have it at home then they go to a mates house and play it. My son is 13 and I put a ban on 18 games, that was until I realised he was going out to play it every day after school at one of his many friends houses. I can't stop what goes on in their house and no matter how much I told him it made no difference.
I don't much like being told off by a 20 year old that hasn't thought her opinions through properly.
It's not easy keeping these things from them you know, especially when they are so heavily targeted by the companies that make them.
I set parental controls on his iPod too, but it only blocked rated websites. What happens when a site isn't rated? Then he can access it, how is THAT a parents fault?
I only let him save and buy one under the condition he is responsible and he gets checked up on, as with the laptop which also has parental control. These unrated sites continue to let us down and puts our kids at risk.
Please don't lecture me!
First time poster long time reader
I think the original posters frustration has respectable foundation. Many parents do not understand technology probably because they do not have the time to understand it and are not exposed to it daily and all they see is their kids lives being taken over by something they have little understanding of. So most parents , justifiably so, make a war cry to have the 'internet companies' better police themselves for the sake of their kids.
There are laws to make sure these companies behave but they are private and ultimately about the money they can make from your kids. So they will do what they can to keep the 'law' happy and make cash. The same goes with real world stores like the well known fast food chains for example.
There are some who will not be happy to hear this but its up to parents to do this policing themselves. Its obvious what sites like Facebook are about and how much information Google will keep on you or the type of videos that are available on you tube or how violent call of duty is. But this is the way of the world now. Mobile telecoms and quasi - virtual existence is the norm. If you do not embrace it will leave you behind, and this is where most parents will fall down.
Its not unknown that your ability to learn through play diminishes as you get older and this i "just dont understand this technology" fear stems from this. A child will button bash a pc or game controler just to see what happens, an older parent will fearfully push a single button wait and probably be glad nothing has does happen. As parents you have to let go of this. You cannot purchase a games console or a computer / hand held device then hand it over to your kids and wonder what they are doing or how its affecting them. If you are not tech savvy sit with them and make them show you how it works, even play a game yourself, but the less you understand about these things the more harm you believe them to be doing. A little understanding can go a long way.
I think its a shame that mumsnet does not have a dedicated technology section.
What an arogant little sod you are. Parentling is about much more than games and you not hearing squeaky voices.
Yes you read those things, but how many of them are true? About as many that say people your age are lazy arrogant twits.
Go away and grow up a bit.
I think you've spotted a niche oportunity, OP.
Technilogical illiterates could hire you to set up child controls on their computers, give internet safety advice etc. I have no idea about computer games as DH has banned them forever from the house (fine now the DC are 5 and 2 but I see trouble ahead!).
Ok op. How much will it cost to get maximum protection on pc's? Not all parents are rich. Some parents allow their kids to play black ops. Since you don't have children you will never realise how other parents will react to a comment such as: "you do realise that's an 18 & your child is only 10?" parent would feel either ashamed, angry you said that, think you wrap your kid in cotton wool or be worried social services will be called.
I'm a 20 year old mother with a 5 year old child. Until you have kids you'll never understand how confusing it can be & frustrating to do what's best to make your child happy & safe but not get nasty comments from others.
Aaaaargh Zombie thread!!!!
<<hands OFRS out>>
I agree whole heatedly with your first and subsequent few post.
You're hectoring now. What more do you want? Everybody has informed you what they do. As nobody can speak for all parents as an entire group what do you want?
Ahhhhh always lovely to have a 20 year old lecturing.
Would love to see the long list of things "my kids will never do...", everyone with children has had one!
I think there is only a certain amount of contol a parent can have over content that is viewed by their children. Especially as children get older, they have other options than computers at home to access inapropriate material.
I know when I was growing up (i am 23) it was extremly easy to access things that shouldnt have been as not all parents were strict or even knew of the dangers of the internet etc.
I do agree with most of what the OP says but i dont beleive that it is realistic to assume that ALL parents know how to use filters and that their children wont figure out how to get past them if they are used.
As for 18 rated games, I totally agree that children under 18 should not be able to play these games. Many children will play these games at their friends houses which you have no control over. IMO 1 hour is just as bad as 5 hours if something is inapropriate once you have seen and experienced the violence of some of these games not to mention the bad language used over xbox live and such. But then dont beleive that teenagers will only spend 1 hour on a game even if it is at their friends house. How do parents know what their children are up to while out of their sight?
I think you are misunderstanding. We are all saying (at least, I think we are all saying) that we don't allow it in our own home, but that we are aware that our own home isn't the start and end of what children can access. That's why (a) sometimes some parents get uptight about material being easily available at all (very recent thread as an example -- a seven-year-old was shown clips of a horror film on YouTube by another child at a council-run play club) and (b) you are still going to get "high pitched kids" interfering with your precious xbox live sessions.
And people saying about other parents etc. Yes you can't stop them from doing that but you can talk to the other parent or limit their exposure at home in the environment you do control. You all seem to be mentioning other kids can do it with my child like that is the reason why you don't do it at your own home. Your child getting an hour at a friends house is still not as bad as getting 5 hours in your home.
As said above most parents aren't quite as bad people think but back to the point as we have gone a little off topic.
An 18 rated game isn't technical at all, it is a plastic case with a disc inside, so why are parents still allowing them to have the game, they have to know they are playing it so why not just take the game off them?
(And that's before even considering the number of MN posters who cheerfully say "oh, I can never get the hang of links". Getting the hang of links, let's remember, involves either taking off the http:// and putting double square brackets round it (following the simple instructions right underneath the message box) or ticking the "Convert links automatically" box.)
So, scaryfairy, if you can use a simple text-based messaging system on your home PC you can keep your children safe on any computer or mobile device, belonging to anyone, anywhere in the world, even if they are technology whizzes and trying to evade your restrictions?
I remember being at High school and Ceefax being introduced. We were led into a darkened room off the library to witness this technological wonder. I was 29 before I personally knew anyone who had a mobile phone (size of a house brick it was).
Anyway despite my great age (or perhaps because of it) I am quite strict with my kids and technology. Age 10 and 11 they had their first mobiles this summer, bog standard mobile for calls and texts only. They have a Wii and a PS and I limit them to an hours play a day. They have no age inappropriate games. They have no computer or Internet access at home, we own a computer but it is 10 years old and so slow I think it must be steam powered.
So I think that makes me a parent that raises my own kids technology wise. But it doesn't stop my dd going to the park and spending time with her 11 yo friend on her friends phone surfing the Internet, You Tube and Facebook. It doesn't stop my ds from going to his friends house and playing cop killing games on the Xbox. Unless you are prepared to lock your kids up and not let them out of your sight, I am finding it is a losing battle. But I personally will not be part of it.
If you can use mumsnet you can keep your kids safe! http://www.thinkuknow.co.uk/ if you ever think you don't need to try and keep up with your kids watch the think you know ceop video.
I met DH just as I turned 24 and he was literally the only person I knew with a mobile phone (he had it for work). Oh, and I can remember getting Mosaic on the computers at work in around 1995 and how incredibly exciting that was (actually, plain-text email on mainframes in the early 90s had been pretty darn exciting, but Mosaic was pretty too...)
Did anyone have The School Computer? We were allowed to look Nd sometimes push a button at primary school. I learnt MS Dos at school. I was 25 when someone in my office got a mobile. I remember company concern over whether to get email. I remember Netscape's interminable dial-ups using a phone line meaning no one could phone you.
Op I'm with you. But most parents don't know where to begin.
No, where I am right is that the supply of an age-restricted game by a parent to a child under the specified age will generally not be an offence.
As your own cut-and-paste says, There are certain circumstances which do not constitute an offence under the Act, such as supplies not in the course of business and exports
which is what I said -- under section 3(2) of the Act supply that is not "for reward" or "in the course or furtherance of a business" is specifically exempted. So a parent giving a game to a child, so long as not for reward or in the course or furtherance of a business, is not an offence. It's likely to be a bloody stupid idea, and it's not exactly responsible parenting, but it's not an offence.
That's entirely separate from the PEGI/BBFC point (less relevant anyway as it strikes me that a lot of games are getting BBFC rather than PEGI certification now anyway, although that's just an impression).
On an extra note, here is it from the legal documents.
Offences, Defences & Penalties:
Sections 9 - 15 0f the Act
The offences established by the Act relate to the illegal supply of video recordings of video works. There are certain circumstances which do not constitute an offence under the Act, such as supplies not in the course of business and exports (see the section dealing with exempt supplies) but generally the following offences are created by the Act:
1. Supplying or offering to supply an uncertificated video or game.
2. Possessing an uncertificated video or game for the purpose of supply.
3. Supplying or offering to supply a video or game to a person below the age specified in its classification.
4. Supplying or offering to supply a "Restricted 18" video or game on premises other than a licensed sex shop.
5. Supplying or offering to supply a video or game which is not labelled with its classification in accordance with the regulations (eg. symbol does not appear in colour).
6. Supplying or offering to supply a falsely labelled video or game (eg. where a work which has an 18 classification is labelled as 15).
Conviction on the first two of these offences, which are regarded as more serious than the others, can result in the imposition of unlimited fines and imprisonment for up to two years. For the fifth offence it can result in a fine of up to £5,000. On all the others the penalty is a fine of up to £5,000 and imprisonment for up to six months. The penalties were significantly increased by the 1994 Act.
The Act provides the authorities with special powers of search, seizure and arrest. The videos or games in respect of which anyone is convicted under the Act and other associated illicit videos or games are liable to forfeiture.
It is a defence to a prosecution if the video or game is exempt from classification (see section 2 of the Act) or the supply is an exempted supply (see section 3). Beyond this there are certain other defences.
It is a defence to a prosecution for supplying an age-restricted title (those currently granted a 12, 15 or 18 classification) if the accused did not know or believe that the title was an age-restricted title or did not know or believe that the person to whom the title had been supplied had not attained the specified age. The 1993 Act amended the 1984 Act (sub-section 14A) and provided for the defence of 'due diligence' to become available in prosecutions. In effect this defence means that the courts can recognise efforts made to comply with the law even though a mistake may have been made. The amendment became law in September 1993.
Where you are right most games are classified by the PEGI system which is not a legal requirement but actually a guideline, some games are so violent that instead they are classified by the BBFC, the same people that rate DVD's, this classification is a legal requirement.
There is a European-wide voluntary rating system in operation for video games that do not need to be classified. This is called the PEGI system and it is administered in the UK by the Video Standards Council, that is the non legal system.
Here is black ops no the BBFC
and here is the law regarding young people
It is an offence to supply a classified DVD or videogame to someone who is below the age specified in the classification.
Join the discussion
Please login first.