To be furious that DS and friends have drawn on faces with sharpie at sleepover

[peoplepleaser1]

Yesterday was DS' 12th birthday. He had 6 friends sleep overnight.

They've been no trouble but I've got up this morning to find they've drawn on the faces of two sleeping friends with sharpie whilst they were asleep.

They have drawn moustaches, bushy eyebrows and cheek roses. I've tried to remove it with them but it's still quite visible. Both kids have quite pale skin which has made it even more visible.

I'm mortified, and upset and angry that DS let this happen under our roof. I was responsible for these kids and I feel terrible that they did this.

I've told DS to carry on as normal and that I'll deal with him once they've all gone home.

I'm not usually very strict and DS is usually a good kid but I'm really annoyed with him- well with all of them tbh but it's not my place to do anything about that.

DS is going to his dads tonight, we aren't together. I have mentioned it to him and he has said I'm ridiculous and overreacting. I planned to ban DS from electronics for a couple of days but his Dad has said he won't back me up so I can't do that.

AIBU and overreacting?!

I don't think a punishment that is harsher than one you would choose is necessarily excessive or random.

Nothing RoryGilmore has said indicates that she wouldn't ensure her child fully understands exactly why what they did was wrong and therefore why they are being punished.

A punishment that completely "reflects" the crime isn't always possible or appropriate (ie putting pen on the face of the perpetrator) and I think there are plenty of parents who would feel a punishment more severe than just apologising is appropriate here.

Comparing banning electronics to a smack isn't really appropriate in my view.

Obviously banning electronics isn't directly comparable to a smack, @PCohle. But that kind of punishment seems to me to be counter-productive.

Productive punishments:

Child uses a stick to hit another child. You confiscate stick. Child apologises to hurt child.

Teenager raids your bedroom and takes your only decent hand cream (when she has several tubes of her own). You dock her allowance to replace it. She apologises when she remembers that she might want something from you before long.

Child uses technology to hurt/humiliate/frighten/belittle another child: you confiscate technology for a considerable period. Child apologises to other child.

(Obviously these all also involve conversations with the child/teenager about why their actions were wrong).

Unproductive punishments:

Child does something unkind which puts another child in a position where they could be picked on/humiliated/unhappy. You confiscate their technology. Just why?

Child is cheeky. You smack child. (my smacking example wasn't suggesting that the two punishments are on a par per se - more that they are so unconnected to the offence that they are meaningless to the perpetrator).

From this, the child learns: I draw on my friend's face, so I lose my phone. So I won't draw on my friend's face again, because I don't want to lose my phone.

However, the child has not learnt anything from the experience, other than not to draw on people because something bad will happen to them as a result. They haven't learnt about why it's wrong to do things to people without permission. They haven't learnt to consider how their 'jokes' might not be funny to the person on the receiving end. They haven't learnt to see things from the other person's point of view. They have in fact learnt absolutely nothing of any value from the whole incident, and have not been given any chance to try to make amends for wrong-doing.

This has nothing to do with not being firm or worrying about my children not liking me.

I think calling this an "assault" is a little bit too much, but a hard talk is certainly due.
My oldest, when he was 3 and in nursery, borrowed a laundry marker from the teacher and "decorated" a couple of his classmates. At that age he only knew how to write his own name, so the boys went home adorned with, say, "Ryan" on their hands, foreheads and cheeks. It took almost a full week for the traces to come off, and drop-offs and pick-ups were truly embarrassing. If any of you are reading this now, I am still sorry!

I don't understand why (i) apologising/making amends and (ii) learning to understand why the action was wrong and why the other individual was upset, would be precluded by another form of punishment also taking place.

If the punishment (in addition to apologising etc) can only directly relate to the incident in question then the punishment doesn't seem to fit the severity of the offence, only the nature of the offence. To use some of your examples:

Child actually injures someone with a stick (serious) and has the stick removed (not a severe punishment).

Child uses handcream (less serious) and has allowance docked (quite severe in my house where allowance is earned).

My children are aware that access to their technology for recreational purposes is a privilege not a right, and is conditional on their good behaviour. The two are firmly connected in their minds.

silvercuckoo you may think it is : a bit much: to call it assault ,however the law does not agree with you.a quick Google would tell you people have been convicted of assault for doing exactly this!

My oldest, when he was 3 and in nursery, borrowed a laundry marker from the teacher and "decorated" a couple of his classmates. At that age he only knew how to write his own name, so the boys went home adorned with, say, "Ryan" on their hands, foreheads and cheeks. It took almost a full week for the traces to come off, and drop-offs and pick-ups were truly embarrassing. If any of you are reading this now, I am still sorry!

Sorry- but that is one of the funniest things I have read on Mumsnet for a while

< has visions of multiple small children with RYAN written in them >

(on them)

Jess I tried to take it further. I even had contact with chief of police for my county.
Unfortunately ds was at local academy school who were so unhelpful and even sabotaged it (at one point they were saying it was just an accusation by ds even though they rang to say they'd removed and excluded child for 2 days).
Police were adamant they give schools powers to deal with stuff in school. I still have the email!!

Boarding school welcome and Thankyou for being a voice of reason!
It seems those of us who are saying they need to know it's wrong and not a prank are boring old farts and want the child punished to the highest level.
That's not true at all!
Just they need to they fucked up - not be encouraged to repeat it at uni parties and stag does etc.

it's a form of bullying.

Thanks, @youarenotkiddingme You put it well and more succinctly than I do!

IME (not least of having been married to someone who went in for bizarre and random and, worst of all, unpredictable punishments) children who are given these kinds of punishments just learn to lie. What 12 yo is going to tell the truth if they think they'll lose their beloved technology as a result of admitting to a fuck-up?

But children do still need some form of punishment at times. Simply admitting to doing it doesn't absolve you.

Yes, talk to them about why they did it and wider implications but actually they also need to know that there are consequences.

What are this boy's consequences for what he did?

@LittleChristmasMouse I suppose the obvious 'natural' punishment (should one be needed in the OP's situation - and I am aware that we weren't there and can only base all our comments on what we've read on here) would be to ban sleepovers for a period of X. The misdemeanour happened on a sleepover, so preventing the child from either hosting or attending them for a while would seem logical. It would also make sense to the child.

@Dana28 could you link one of those examples? I can't find one.

Daily mail link - www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3744713/amp/Scotland-nursery-worker-drew-moustache-sleeping-toddler-s-face-permanent-marker-guilty-assault.html

@PCohle not really the same is it? She tripped, slapped etc. It's also in the daily mail so a crock of shite!

I was actually looking for a like for like story!

I don't think it's the same at all no.

But I don't think anyone on the thread is actually advocating going to the police and trying to have the child prosecuted. I certainly doubt the CPS would consider it in the public interest to prosecute.

The case does illustrate that drawing on someone's face whilst they sleep, without their consent, is capable of constituting assault.

If you're looking for a case on identical facts, I think you'll be waiting a while. That doesn't tend to be how legal precedent works, sadly!

The case was widely reported at the time so there will be other sources if you prefer.

@PCohle my question was to @Dana28 who stated that a "quick google" would prove people had been prosecuted.

You've no idea if the single act of drawing would constitute assault, it was the whole situation that brought about the prosecution.

Well I'll let Dana answer you then.

I only answered because I'm my opinion it does. I thought people claiming this was assault were being completely ridiculous, but I did a search to check and realised I was wrong. I haven't come across a case on identical facts, but frankly I wouldn't expect to - the case law makes the law on the clear enough (imho).

In my job I have to regularly complain to the CPS about the mistakes they make so I wouldn't hold any advice they gave in high esteem - sorry. How they get away with the decisions they make is beyond me - someone needs to be a whistleblower in that organisation!

@PCohle my post was actually tagged for Dana, I wouldn't expect identical but vaguely similar would be interesting. Your example wasn't remotely similar. She tripped up, pulled legs and slapped children, you've fallen for the "jailed for drawing moustaches" bullshit headline. I find a lot of daily mail readers fall for this type of "drama" headline and repeat it to everyone that has the time to listen, read the full article and make your own decision of why the women was charged.

The vast majority of assault cases are unreported in the law reports because they add little of legal note. Often the mainstream press are the only ones who pick up legally speaking run of the mill assault cases because the details are of public interest.

If you are interested in the details of the case I suggest you read the sentencing statement, which reflects the three elements of the assault charge clearly: "I found you guilty of all three elements, namely that you assaulted the boy in that you did obstruct his path, causing him to trip and fall to the ground, you did draw on his face using a marker pen and you did seize him on the ankles causing him to fall to the ground. "

I'm not sure where you got the impression that I think drawing on the child's face was "all" she did?

I wouldn't class myself as a daily mail reader, just someone who knows how google works...

rather than all the drama, and talk of assault and human rights, I see it as a chance to point out that sometimes life sucks, but at least you had a fun night, it's only a bit of pen, why not wear it as a badge of honour, like men with hangovers.

@PCohle I asked Dana to link the cases on google, you linked something that's not the same as the "cases" Dana reckons are on google.

I don't know why you linked that story you'd have to tell me that? The drawing on the face was a part of it.

You can't use google clearly because you're not able to link any similar case to OP, or maybe they just don't exist...... because I can also use google and can't find them.

Perhaps you should just leave Dana to answer the question I asked her, she clearly has a different google?

Ok I will, calm down.

Just trying to help...