To think that we should be holding parents more accountable if their young children are abused by men they meet online..

[TheInnerVoice]

Story on the BBC this morning about how tinder and grinder need to take more responsibility to prevent young children being abused by men they meet online. The examples they gave were of children as young as eight having been groomed on tinder, and obviously the man who had sex with a twelve year old believing she was nineteen.

Now, it goes without saying that if a creep goes online to groom young vulnerable children he is the criminal here. But I can’t help also thinking that if an eight year old has un-checked access to tinder the parents are in part to blame for allowing her to be in that situation in the first place.

And no, we’re not talking teenagers who might be influenced by their friends or might go online at a friend’s house. Eight year olds are to young to have the kinds of friends who would lead them into the likes of tinder, and as such, if an eight year old has tinder and has been groomed online then surely the parents are responsible for allowing that to happen/not knowing what their children are doing?

I don’t think you can hold parents completely responsible - and yes older “friends”steering younger ones badly do happen. I’ve known teens from bad homes (drugs, poverty, abuse, neglect in a combo usually) to latch onto younger kids and steer them wrong. They’re usually 9/10+ though. I can say this confidently as I had a similar friend and if tinder, Pof etc had been around back then I probably would’ve been vulnerable to similar.
However children should have some supervision/checks on their devices and online use... it should never go that far. So I somewhat agree with you, YANBU.

I don't disagree with you, but I think the entire matter is very murky in terms of responsibility.

That story about the 12 year old girl was horrifying, and yes I agree that the parents should be taking some responsibility in that matter and no doubt they are. But are you suggesting they should be prosecuted? At the same level of the man who had sex with her, at a lower level?

I find it's such a sensitive subject and people have very varying opinions on who is in the wrong and what the punishment should be.

It's a bit shocking that a child as young as 8 has enough unsupervised access to the internet that they can get abused like this.

there has to be parental responsibility and education!

Well, let's say we make parents accountable for their child's unfettered access to the internet, as you suggest.

Right, what did that change? Do you think it would change the behaviour of the parent, the child or the criminal?

I think Tinder and Grindr, who make money from their enterprise, need to make any changes they can to not facilitate criminal's access to children.

And then you can go ahead and look to hold the parents accountable if you like but the opportunity to stop the assault in the first place shouldn't be missed.

Parents should be doing more to keep their children safe online. A lot of adults don't know how to use/access some of these sites so would have no clue what they are even looking for.
Our school runs internet courses for parents to show them how to use the social media sites, what dangers to look out for etc.. it's so helpful to the parents who have no idea.

Young children should not have unsupervised access to the internet. Older children should have their use of the internet/apps regularly/occasionally (depending on age) checked with any issues being addressed. NO children should have access to Tinder or Grindr.

I think Tinder and Grindr, who make money from their enterprise, need to make any changes they can to not facilitate criminal's access to children.

Maybe but, as these are apps for over 18's, it is as much the parent's responsibility to ensure that their children don't have access to these apps.

I work with many families where the parents simply don't have the capacity to protect and educate their children in the way you describe. This might be due to substance abuse, learning needs, mental health issues, whatever the reason they aren't capable. In most cases the parents do their best, but it isn't adequate and consequently their children are much more vulnerable to online grooming, leading potentially to CSE and involvement county lines drug crime. Criminalising parents who are in over their heads won't change anything for the better. In fact it would more likely deter them from accepting any kind of professional help. Tech companies need to take their share of responsibility.

I agree with you. It’s illegal to have child in your car without a seatbelt, punished by a large fine. Before that it was a grey area and not everyone did it. Same with smoking in the car.

But I take a harder line and would prosecute everyone who suspected and didn’t act on it, knew about it but didn’t do anything or who should have known. I’m the kind of cynical person who thinks threats of prison would make everyone more responsible. I will never get anywhere suggestig we through doctors, teachers, social workers and parents in prison but I’ll keep saying it.

@Purpleboy

"Our school runs internet courses for parents to show them how to use the social media sites, what dangers to look out for etc.. it's so helpful to the parents who have no idea."

This sort of thing can be really helpful. To be honest though, even if these courses aren't available, the information is really easy to find online (if you can open Chrome and use a keyboard there is a wealth of internet safety information for parents).

Our school runs internet courses for parents to show them how to use the social media sites, what dangers to look out for etc.. it's so helpful to the parents who have no idea.

This is something that should be offered to all parents if kids of say 8/9 and treated as important, like vaccines or any other public health initiative that is designed to protect children.

I was part of the first generation that grew up with chat rooms and msn, followed by social media. I’m 30 now, and I still wouldn’t feel confident that a young teenager wouldn’t be able to run rings around me by being able to disguise unsafe behaviours on a smart phone.

Lets be honest though - there are huge swathes of parents who think it won't happen to their child and thus absolve themselves of actually parenting when it comes to kids being online/social media. DD's classmates, who are 10 and have phones (DD doesn't have one yet), all have instagram accounts and whatsapp each other etc. The boys (mainly) all play fortnite. All of the above have age restrictions. Do you think any of these parents monitor these with their 10 yr olds? I can tell you - not one. Our yr 6 teacher reminded parents recently that most of these have 13+ age restrictions and all the parents were in a fuss about 'I can't possibly tell Jemima to get off instagram' etc etc. It is harder to parent and say no to things so many many parents just don't do it. In a long winded way, OP, I agree parents need to take greater responsibility.

Maybe but, as these are apps for over 18's, it is as much the parent's responsibility to ensure that their children don't have access to these apps.

And when they fail in that responsibility? Then what?

We ask for id for cigarettes and alcohol. We don't rely on the parents alone. If barriers can be put in place to protect children at risk on these platforms, then I think it's worth doing.

Sorry but saying that some parents aren’t equipped to keep their children safe isn’t good enough. We wouldn’t take that approach to alcohol would we? If children were constantly being left on their own at home, not being adequately fed/cared for plans would be put in place to deal with those situations. So why should the internet be any different?

I think that a lot of adults are naive in terms of the use of the net because it’s something which has materialised within their lifetime. But now we are reaching a stage where those parents have had children, and the internet is such that not everyone online is a decent person with decent values etc, in fact many use the internet and people’s naivety to prey on vulnerable individuals.

It happens to adults as much as children - another story yesterday talked about the number of people who have fallen victim to financial scams online.

So maybe if the internet is an impossible thing to keep your children away from the internet for say, under thirteens should be made illegal. We’ve managed it with alcohol, smoking, driving, it’s law to wear a seatbelt so why not the internet as well?

Because a) kids are sneaky and b) they'll go more wild when they have suddenly got access to something they were banned from.

They need to learn very, very early that people on the internet are not to be trusted. They need to learn as soon as it is age appropriate- and I'd honestly say teens- exactly why.

Teenagers talk about sex enough in school. Telling them that older men sometimes pretend to be younger kids to trick them into having sex and can really hurt, sometimes kill, the kids they get hold of is factual. It's a hard conversation to have but they'd understand more than 'because I said so'.

Younger kids, 'because sometimes mean people lie on the internet in order to hurt people, like X villain hurt y characters in z Disney movie'. They can tolerate the concept of baddies and lying.

Because a) kids are sneaky and b) they'll go more wild when they have suddenly got access to something they were banned from. and? That’s the biggest cop out in the book. Children aren’t allowed to drive or drink or smoke and yes some of them go a bit mad in the beginning but should that be a reason to lift restrictions on alcohol/driving/cigarettes?

And nobody has said the apps shouldn’t be able to (where possible) put restrictions in place to prevent under age children from joining, but if an eight year old is accessing tinder to the point they have been groomed without their parents’ knowledge then the parents are culpable for what happens to them if something bad happens.

If you expose a child to sexual content on television/in rl that can be an offence. So why is the internet different just because people feel that children are sneaky and parents should be absolved because of that fact? What happened to actually parenting children?

It would be easier to keep children and teens safe is schools didn’t insist all homework being online. It’s is not possible to sit next to a 13 year old at their desk while they complete 90 mins of homework.

Actually parenting =/= banning if you ask me.

Guiding, supervising & explaining much better than banning imho

And nobody has said the apps shouldn’t be able to (where possible) put restrictions in place to prevent under age children from joining, but if an eight year old is accessing tinder to the point they have been groomed without their parents’ knowledge then the parents are culpable for what happens to them if something bad happens.

The only reason I'm bringing up restrictions on these sites is because you have it right up there in the op, next to your observation that the parent is culpable.

I agree with you, yes they are. My only point is that making parents responsible won't change things and that accepting that and putting the onus on these platforms in the sensible move.

*Actually parenting =/= banning if you ask me.

Guiding, supervising & explaining much better than banning imho*

It depends. Guiding, supervising and explaining are all incredibly important aspects of parenting, as is encouraging open communication.

Banning can still play a part though. My stepdaughter (12) is banned from having Snapchat (I think Tinder and Grindr are a given!) because I believe that the dangers far outweigh the benefits to her.

@PBo83 absolutely makes sense- OP suggested in her last post that we ban all under 13s from the internet

And those abused by women?

Banning under 13s from the Internet would make things difficult, given that most of my 11yo's homework is on online platforms.

Shouldn't we be talking about the perpetrators of abuse? Why aren't we questioning their parenting, their upbringing? Yes there are questions to be asked of CSE and how vulnerable children are able to be exploited but can we not victim blame the children via the parents.

Children are abused because people are abusive. Lets start there!

The only reason I suggested banning under 13’s from the internet is because it’s been suggested here that parents can’t possibly be expected to take responsibility for what their children are doing online as the children will be sneaky and do it anyway.