Should parents ever be responsible for the actions of their children?

[mids2019]

OK this is an extreme example for. The US which is quite shocking but in principle should parents ever be responsible for the actions of their children? For instance if someone is brought up in a particularly terrible way should there be a penalty applied to a parent where the children commits a crime? On the whole I think not but it's an interesting question....

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68223118

They refused to get him medical help for mental health which he requested. They bought him a gun a few days before the incident. They cut short a meeting with the school that day to discuss a disturbing picture he’d drawn and refused to keep him home despite schools request. They refused to acknowledge he had mental health issues. That was what I read from a bbc article briefly last night and although I was shocked at the ruling (hadn’t seen it before), yes I think they had some responsibility.

Professionals are expected to report any concerns or risk a disciplinary (nurses, teachers, police, health visitors etc). If parents don't report concerns then they should also be liable.

If a parent has been shouting from the rooftops for support for their child then no.

if a parent has ignored things, or worse enabled them then yes they should. it will be extreme cases but it shouldn’t be ignored.

The parents did everything that they shouldn't have, I really don't understand why they bought him a gun

I was initially shocked when I saw a headline for that story, but the details do seem to make it a more reasonable-sounding legal action.
I don't see it as making them responsible for the child's actions: It is more a question of holding them responsible for their own negligent behaviour, particularly in relation to the gun.
The thing that does make it slightly worrying is a kind of background cultural context in which women (much more than men) are over-blamed in relation to their children. I'm remembering the archaic psychologist account of autism,which viewed it as having been caused by 'refrigerator mothers' who failed to give the correct nurturing. Never underestimate the power of our culture to throw excessive shit at women.

Of course, We Need to Talk about Kevin is a brilliant book that explores exactly this issue.

I was quite shocked by this, the I read the article and thought they actually caused this situation as he had been asking for help and they ignored it.

I would agree it needs to be looked at on a case by case basis. But in this case they where right to prosecute the parents. I'm honest not sure what they though they where doing.

They are prosecuting the farther to, it's just her trial was first.

This isn’t unique. There has been at least one case in Europe where one parent of a school shooter was convicted of negligent homicide because they had not kept their legally held weapons safely stored away. Of course this type of negligent behaviour needs to be punished.

I was worried by this until I read it and yes I agree with the jury’s decision as they bought him the gun and they were asked to take him home the day of the shooting and refused. They literally put the gun in his hand and they knew he was having difficulties.

One thing where there should be a responsibility is where dogs or other pets attack someone. Not sure about parents, though if it extended to those (usually dads) who want or have nothing to do with their children, maybe it would have an impact.

I agree with the verdict and I think in reality this as much about the strange fun laws in the US. The parents were horrendously negligent but I suppose they ultimately did not shoot anyone; it was the actions of another. I can't see a case like this in the UK but in reality how many especially young killers /criminals have great backgrounds and I suppose it is slightly unnerving that parental upbringing can never be at fault in a criminal sense.

Buying a gun for anyone who is planning a crime is itself a crime.

This is still true if you are a parent.

The parents here aren’t being held to account in some vicarious ‘holding them
responsible’ way. They’re being prosecuted (and convicted) for actually aiding him in committing the crime. Buying him a gun FFS!

There are lots of examples of joint enterprise convictions though. Joint enterprise allows someone to be jointly convicted of a crime committed by someone else if the court decides they foresaw that the other party was likely to commit that crime.

You don’t have to shoot someone to bear some of the responsibility. Arming your unstable teenage son with a gun is a situation where you can reasonably foresee that he’s going to use it to hurt people.

Addition: there’s unlikely to be a case like it in the UK because laws and culture around guns are so different. A parent who bought their unstable son a large knife that he then used to kill people might find themselves in significant trouble.

A one off stealing a packet of sweets no

Mass shooting yes

In the circumstances of these parents then absolutely yes.

Initially I was against it but then, as a poster above, the child had issues and asked for help. School asked for help from the parents and they walked out of a meeting. They are responsible here.

I think it's very dependent on circumstances and there is no one size fits all answer.

Parents have routinely been sued in civil
court but victim’s families, if there was a case to make that they could foresee what was happening and neglected to take any action to help their child. It makes sense that a criminal prosecution has now been tried, particularly here where they sound like co-conspirators in it. They had a mental unwell child who asked for help, they had the school asking them for help and support and they ignored it all and bought him a gun. Given the huge issue of mass shootings by teenagers with nothing really being done to deal with gun violence, maybe the way forward is to examine all those around the perpetrator to see what actions they failed to take despite warnings. If enough people are convicted or forced to make huge compensation payments, then we may see a more proactive approach from parents and school districts in really looking for and organising intervention in obviously disturbed children. It will also hopefully make all the fun owning parents ensure that their guns are totally inaccessible to their kids.

It sounds as though the school will be facing civil action for wrongful death and probably this mother as well.

Only under exceptional specific circumstances.

If your kid tells you that they feel like hurting someone, and your response is "well that's OK sweetheart, here, you should carry this big knife with you in case you get the urge". Then yes.

However, should a parent be held responsible if they buy their child a car and that child ends up killing someone in a collision?

On the facts of this case, yes they should. Some US Law Professor quoted in the Guardian was trying to construct - and failing to my mind - to construct a legal agrument saying they weren't.

It really think it depends on the circumstances… I read an article about this the other day and until I found out the parents were alleged to have bought the gun for their son, after that I wasn’t sure what to think. It did feel significant to me that the mother was convicted first…
In instances where serious parental neglect/abuse are verifiable factors in the committal of a crime I do feel this is worth pursuing in some way whatever the crime.

I thought that’s what happened in the Brianna Ghey case? The lads dad bought him some knives. He isn’t being prosecuted.

I was an adult before I realised this wasn't the case ordinarily in UK.
My parents had lots of children and my DM's mantra when warning us about not getting into trouble was that her and DF could be prosecuted for any crimes we committed. We all took it as gospel and didn't step a foot out of line

I know the US has a lot of guns but I am somewhat gobsmacked that is is apparently legal in to give a 15 year old child a gun.