Phone taken away dd on sleepover?

[upsideup]

DD(10) was on a sleepover last night, first sleepover with this girl but we have had the girl at ours a few times before, her mum has always asked that we take her dd's phone off her before bed which we have done( we plug it in outside dd's bedroom so she could still get it if she needs it) but I remember having the conversation that my dd likes to have her phone with her on sleepovers so she is able contact us.
The mum took dd's phone of her at 8 last night and put it in her bedroom, dd did ask if she could keep it turned off in her bag but she wasnt allowed, shes' quite anxious about sleepovers and knowing she can text us to come pick her up etc without talking to the parents make her more comfortable, she also does contact us a bit anyway to say goodnight and check when we are picking her up etc. Shes also didnt get her phone back untill we picked her up at 11 because she was too nervous to ask for it.
We were a bit worried that she hadnt replied when we text goodnight and we were on are way, but I had assumed she was having too much fun and hadnt thought to check her phone not that she wasnt allowed to.
DD was upset when we picked her up, obviously not to tears or anything but it did make her feel uncomfortable that someone else took her phone and she wasnt able to contact us, she wasnt able to get any sleep because she was worried about it.

AIBU in that she shouldnt of done that without contacting me first?
The girls are quickly becomming close friends so its likely dd will get more sleepover invites, can I or how can I tell the mum that I would like dd to keep her phone?

[snash12]

Sorry but I think YABU

[upsideup]

Coyoacan

I have already replied to you the first time when you tried to suggest I am banning my daughter from doing going somewhere she wants to the first time.

upsideup Sat 17-Mar-18 16:16:59

Coyoacan

I havnt banned her from going anywhere (where have I said I did? ), she doesnt feel comfortable going so she wont be going, if and when she wants to go again then she can.

But go ahead ignore that and make the same ridiculous and untrue suggestion again.

[upsideup]

Thankyou for the helpful replies and that does include some but not all of the replies saying I am being unreasonable as well.

[Coyoacan]

Sorry upsidedown, I didn't see your answer (eats humble pie)

[ChocolateWombat]

If my child were going to a sleepover and then came home and said they had been allowed to keep their phones all night, and that people had been on social media (and I know Ops DD has a brick phone not smart phone) and sending pictures and all kinds of messages, I would hold the parents responsible for allowing them to have those phones overnight, when all of the recommendations are not to let groups have phones overnight, because these exact things happen.

I would rather my child was asked to leave their phone downstairs and knew they could speak to the host to make contact with home if it became necessary, than there was the risk of this behaviour - which is fairly likely if a group of kids have phones in their rooms over night.

In the end, a lot of this is about assessing risk accurately. The risk of desperately needing to contact a parent and only your own mobile being a possible way to do that, is very very small. Most of the awful things that could happen are extremely unlikely and would not be prevented by having a mobile. Deciding this risk is high at a sleepover should result in not sending a child to the sleepover, because that is the action to keep them safe, not sending them with a phone.

The risk of a group of kids using phones to access social media, the Internet, to take photos or to send inappropriate messages is very high. These things in themselves can be very harmful. Not having phones or other devices in bedrooms would significantly reduce this risk.

So you weigh one against the other. You know that kids without mobiles in bedrooms are not being denied access to an adult or even the opportunity to speak with a parent if they need to (there are landlines and if there were a need, the host would give access to the mobile for use) so if contact is needed, it is possible, but the risks of inappropriate mobile use are severely reduced.

What is this argument about personal property and a right to supersede all house rules? A child could have a phone, or a tablet with porn on it, or alcohol, or a weapon...or any number of items which are undesirable or could be used in an undesirable way. The fact they are owned by the child does not give them a right to keep them with them through the visit. A child going to a sleepover has to come under the jurisdiction of the adult in charge - yes there are ways and means to explain your house rules and to make them happen, but a host must have the right to do that, and if that means asking a child not to have a phone or anything else in the bedroom, then so be it. I have known lots of hosts ask children not to have the £8 of sweets they bought earlier in the day in the bedroom - because they have seen children very sick in the night before following having them - similar thing.

I wouldn't be willing to have a child sleepover at my house if either they or their parents weren't prepared to let me make decisions about their well being. As the responsible adult, I have to be allowed to make decisions to keep them safe. Children's choices are sometimes sensible and appropriate and sometimes they are not - by nature of age and maturity they need adult supervision and a host would be negligent not to provide it.

And yes, some children might have become quite dependent on their phone and feel reassured by having it by their bed at night. I would be happy for them to phone home before bed and/first thing in the morning if they wanted to, but not to allow that phone and all the others because that puts everyone at risk. If they didn't want to stay without their phone nearby, they would simply need to go home.

Hosts will have all kinds of house rules that might differ to your own. They cannot and cannot be expected to list every possible house rule which might come up to the parents of a sleepover child - it would impractical and daft. Parents sending their children don't and cannot expect everything to be laid out and if they have special requirements should discuss how the host feels about them in advance. Sending your child to a sleepover is agreeing to their rules and accepting they take responsibility for that short while.

The bottom line, is that if parents are not prepared to let the host make decisions as they see fit whilst their child is in their care, they shouldn't send their child to a sleepover there.

[Coyoacan]

What a sensible and excellent post, ChocolateWombat

[CheeseyToast]

I am astonished that any parent would be fighting for the right for their child to keep hold of a cellphone during the night. This is so far from reasonable and sensible that I'm left wondering what the hell is going on in a lot of households.

Folks, you need to wise up. First rule of children and cellphones is to keep them out of the bedrooms. If you can cope with factual information, read up on grooming. Buckle up, it's a bumpy read for the ignorant.

[Ijustwantabloodyusername]

What on earth makes you so confident that the host mum "knew beyond doubt" that the visiting child would be anxious etc?

er, because the OP told the other Mum in conversation. I struggle to pick up subtle signs of suggestion, but can see this was a clear set of words.

Janey and Ijust do you/ did you when your child was 10, trust your children's friends not to eat everyone's Easter chocolate, try some alcohol, and watch 18+ horror films?

No. They got a very clear set of 'rules' and there would be a consequence if they weren't followed. I didn't take the stance that I would take control of whatever their parent allowed them to bring, because I want to impose my rules on their child.

Did you follow your own logic and put sleepover kids to bed in a room with lots of your other children's chocolate, an open bottle of alchopop or baileys or other potentially palatable to preteens alcohol, a TV and DVD player and a selection of 18 rated horror and erotic films on display?

Actually, we don't live in a home where everything is locked away for fear that our children can't be trusted. Everything has always been open and accessible, and guess what, because we've not been over the top about certain things not being 'allowed', we've never had anything like the scenario you're suggesting. If that is the case for anyones child, then their parent has alot of work to do themself.

My children have managed to get to their mid-teens without the awful behaviour you're suggesting could happen on a sleepover. They clearly have a good set of ground rules and are respectful enough to mostly abide by them, as have their friends when sleeping here.

No person - adult or child - has the right to do anything in others' homes. Similarly, the Mum in question did not have the right to dictate in OPs house and then keep her DDs phone in her bedroom, knowing that OPs DD could not get it back until 11am the next day.

[Lweji]

er, because the OP told the other Mum in conversation

Yes, but when?
Lots of things said in conversation are easily forgotten unless they are relevant at the time.
Mentioning it in conversation is not the same as specifically telling the mother when dropping off the child.

[Ijustwantabloodyusername]

Buckle up, it's a bumpy read for the ignorant.

Absolutely, some ignorant people should also read up on independence & anxiety for the less confident in society.

[Ijustwantabloodyusername]

It was spoke about whilst talking sleepovers - that's a more specific chat when that is what actually happened!

[Lweji]

The OP hasn't said when and in which circumstances that conversation occurred. Unless it was at drop off she can't assume the other parent would remember.
And from the context of her posts it seems that it was an earlier conversation, so you're unreasonable to be so adamant about this.

Nobody realised it was a thing, or I'm sure the OP would have told the other mother that her DD could only go if allowed her phone, or prepare her child not to have her phone.

It's somehing to remember for future sleepovers anywhere.

[Ijustwantabloodyusername]

*And from the context of her posts it seems that it was an earlier conversation, so you're unreasonable to be so adamant about this.

You're also unreasonable to be so adamant that it's the opposite, as are numerous other posters. It was said in the conversation about sleepovers. People can't change the OPs conversation to suit.

I think I'll leave it here with you, and agree to disagree.

[Lweji]

You're also unreasonable to be so adamant that it's the opposite

Erm...
I'm not adamant it's the opposite.
Did you read the rest of that post and my other posts?