I think it's unacceptable to go through a teenagers phone

[orangedod]

Am I the only one? I hope I'm not the only one.

I see so many threads and hear so many mums talking about going through teenagers phones and I really disagree with it.

I completely understand about keeping them safe but to me it seems like a major invasion of privacy. I know full well that my mum never went through mine and there was a massive trust there.

What's everyone's stance on this? Am I alone in my opinion?

Ive had deal with a 13 year old at our football club being groomed and invited to meet a random bloke on line. Ive seen yr4 kids at our school having on line chats with random blokes on tik tok. They are not adults and don't have full understanding

An older teenager 17 / 18 years of course deserves a greater degree of autonomy & trust.

An 'older teenager of 18' is an adult! As a parent I'd have no right to go through my adult daughter's phone any more than I would have a right to go through yours.

And for someone complaining about strawmen, you really know how to build them! The real world doesn’t have an off switch
I didn't mention the real world.

I drew a comparison between freedom online and freedom offline. Very different. Both are part of the real world.

Few parents would allow their child total freedom to go where they want, meet up with who they want offline, yet give their child the freedom do talk to who they want online.

It's not a straw man. Either it's acceptable to monitor what children are doing (naturally adjusting for age) or it's not.

It can't be totally fine to check where they're going offline, who they're friends with and so on offline, but then some horrendous violation of the right to privacy to do the equivalent for the online elements of their life.

TrainspottingWelsh I'm not missing the middle ground. I've said there's a middle ground most people advocate where it isn't 'supervising like fuck' or trawling through everything, nor is it not supervising because any looking at a child's online material is somehow a terrible human rights issue. Most people fall in the middle.

Totally depends. Under 13 yes. 13-15 occasionally but I don't sit and read her chats at all...I just have a look through for any red flags. My son is 15 and I dont look at his phone in general but the other month I knew he was lying so I intercepted it but he willingly handed it over to me!

Lola

Stop being so flipping sensible and measured. It needs to be easier for posters to say you’re a giant fascist who locks her kids in the metaphorical gulag,

smile

Who'd have thought it's totally possible to have reasonable parental oversight of online and offline areas of a child's life that decreases as a child gets older and more mature.

I find it maddening that we live in a world where there's threads in July of parents worrying about their child walking or getting the bus to secondary school because it's dangerous, but many of those kids will have had a smartphone through y6, their own social media apps and access to the internet in their pocket. Then by their teens it's fine to check up on offline friends, know where a child is, who they're with, but an absolute invasion of privacy to do the same with their online interactions.

Lolasmiles
You know very well that online = virtual world and offline= real world by definition. They’re not an equivalent environment at all because the real world is far more dangerous than the virtual one. There is no off switch. You can’t simply disconnect to take yourself out of a dangerous situation in real life. Bullying online versus bullying in real life behind the school surrounded by hostile teens have two very different danger and risk levels.

So it makes sense to maintain awareness of their physical whereabouts. In addition, on the one hand you are asking the child who are you meeting? Who is this friend? And they give you some information.

But if you are monitoring their phones, you’re not asking for information from them. You bypassing them and going through their private communications to take the information. The online equivalent to asking them “who is this friend?” in real life, is asking them “anyone new added to your contacts list?” And accepting the information they choose to give you.

Secondly, you can in fact supervise your children without monitoring their phones. Just like a supervisor can monitor their work subordinates without monitoring their phones/emails/texts.

because the real world is far more dangerous than the virtual one

Tell this to the child goaded to taking nude photos and sending them out.

The child who is bullied into self harm.

The child involved in pro ana sites

The child watching hard core porn.

Then there is all the “warm up work” online activity can provide, meaning the offline world becomes much more immediately dangerous:

The child groomed online so it only takes one RL meeting for them to be embroiled in CSE.

The children run over county lines.

The children groomed into terrorism.

You’re incredibly naive.

Then by their teens it's fine to check up on offline friends, know where a child is, who they're with, but an absolute invasion of privacy to do the same with their online interactions.

The difference is how you go about checking up on them. If you’re asking them to give you information that is one thing. But just going into their personal accounts and taking the information without asking and bypassing them is quite another.

Similar to say your partner has lost their job and is home unemployed for several months. You can either ask them how many job applications did you do today? And get the information in a way that respects their privacy OR you can when they are busy watching DCs, and unknown to them access their email, LinkedIn and job board accounts and scroll through to see what jobs they applied for yourself. Then go downstairs and comment ‘I see you only applied to two jobs today...’.

Can you hand on heart tell me that the second method is not an invasion of privacy and does not indicate lack of respect and trust?

Sigh Smile All Day

Everything you listed are things that happen in the real world.
A child self harms in the real world
A child meets a CSE gangster in the real world
A child does terrorism in the real world
A child involved in pro ana, stops eating in the real world

I don’t need to go on. The dangers these sites present are all translated into real world effects which if you are aware of, you can handle.

Totally agree with you OP.

ok Plan

You are worryingly entrenched in your view. The police have an entire dept dedicated to online harm. There are many, many organisations whose sole purpose is to prevent online harm.

You have no idea how insidious this stuff can be - and how very far into harm children can be before anyone picks up on things in your “real world”.

Isn’t it about responsibility and respect, rather than age.

Responsibility includes protection and welfare. I was POA for my mother with dementia. Step by step I had to intrude on her privacy to ensure she was not at risk. I took away her cheque book when she started giving her bank details to cold callers. I arranged overnight care when she was discharged from hospital. She did not like this and threw some major teenage tantrums.

My aim was for her to retain as much dignity and independence as possible whilst keeping her safe. There was a balance to had and that balance shifted according to circumstance.

If elected the same with DC. When DD was under 13 Irequired her to put her Fb account through my email address so I saw when she was tagged. So stuff was nasty and reflected low level school bullying, which gave me a chance to discuss this.

Beyond that I never had occasion to look at DCs social media. One DC was extremely cautious with a nice group of friends. The other tended towards over-sharing anyway.

However I would have if I felt a balance had shifted. If there had been a sudden change in their behaviour or friendship group. As a parent I would have wanted to understand what was going on. That responsibility would have trumped my respect for their privacy. But obviously done in a way to avoid building unnecessary barriers to future communication.

And yes, I think teenagers need and welcome boundaries, whatever they say. We have seen a few DC who received very liberal child centred parenting who have ended up rudderless, as if anxious about the responsibilities of becoming an adult. Weirdly some, given massive independence when they were young, have ended up as very dependent, as a result of their poor and short term choices around education, drugs and more.

You know very well that online = virtual world and offline= real world by definition.
Using the internet isn't some separate entity. Using the internet, social media, technology happens is part of the real world.

Children are not adults. I haven't a clue why you keep trying to draw false comparisons.

Though amusingly if you're to believe the consensus on some Mumsnet threads it's entirely normal to go through partner's emails/phone, because there's no smoke without fire and if you feel the need to hack your partner's Facebook then that's fine because you have your doubts.

SmileEachDay All those organisations are wrong. All the professionals with appropriate training are wrong. Online is some separate world where only certain types of girls are at risk from groomers and nobody needs to worry if their child is the wrong demographic. Safeguarding issues couldn't affect nice families and good grades is a protective bubble that prevents potential harm.

Sorry about weird typos. iPad seems to be dying.

Cross posted with you Needmoresleep.
You speak a lot of sense and highlight it isn't a case of all or nothing.

Lola

Well that’s a relief actually. Does that mean I can strike all the “online” stuff out of the CPD schedule? Stop the enhanced safeguarding checks and balances because lockdown means kids are largely existing online? Not do any of the endless time consuming online based investigating? Can I never, ever again have a conversation with a parent about the picture of their child’s genitals that has landed, in asked for, in a female students inbox? Please? Can I not? Because that would save me ALOT of time.

You know very well that online = virtual world and offline= real world by definition.

If you really want to look at it this way, fine. But don't forget that the virtual world has far reaching and serious consequences in the "real" world. You can't separate them because they're linked by a person,a child. A child who can suffer "real" harm in the "real" world due to what happens online.

smile
It depends on the children and families involved.
If they're nice middle class families and the children get good grades then you're probably mistaken in thinking anything untoward was going on, after all they're the wrong demographic.

If they have poor grades, non-square friends, live in their area of town that some may consider to be full of troubled families or are the type of girls that groomers like then you probably should continue doing your job.

Safeguarding is only relevant to some children and families after all

Lola

That’s brilliant.

Um. One question. There have definitely been no cases of children in other demographics being bullied/anorexic/groomed for CSE or terrorism/self harming/sexting/watching porn? You’re sure?

orangedod, I understand where you are coming from but why now, specifically? I never went through my son's 'phone (he's 40), wouldn't hae occurred to me to do so, but things were differently a few years back.

However I do agree with your principle that we need to respect the privacy of others and that includes our children.

There is a difference, however, between a 13/14 year old and 17/19.

We had an issue of online grooming with a family member a few years ago, who was only 12 at the time, and the case ended up in court.

DD is only 12, but one of the conditions of her having my old iphone is that she only adds people that she knows and that I can check her phone, contacts, emails etc at any time. I'm not interest in the crap she sends to her friends, but I need to know that she is not being bullied or groomed or viewing inappropriate stuff.

It is responsible parenting and trying to keep your child safe.

My friends DD aged 12 was watching 50 Shades of Grey and her mum had no idea.

Smile Absolutely not. We've been reliably informed that respective professional organisations are wrong.

Excellent! I might have time to actually plan and resource all my lessons properly!

This is a timely thread. I asked DS (15) to let me have a quick check of his phone last week. He flatly refused and kicked off big time. I left it as didn't have the energy for a big row at that point but will insist this afternoon.

He uses fingerprint log in so can't even get find out the code.