Absolutely fuming, please help me calm down before I do something.

[TrappedinSuburbia]

Came home today lunchtime, went to speak to ds (16)who was lying in bed (ie get the washing hung out that I asked you to do before I left this morning).
He stayed in his room the rest of the day, I was up in the next room tidying ds (5) room for a while, not a peep from next door, assumed he was on computer or such like.
Roll on past dinner time, shout them both for dinner.
Roll onto ds (16) leaving for football training (im out in front garden) followed by his girlfriend!
I say 'where did you come from' to which she said 'i've been here all day' as they were both leaving.

What would be your conclusion.
Mine is they were up in his room bloody shagging, I did not see her in the room and the way he was lying in bed there could have been someone in it (I obviously wasn't thinking along those lines though).
I'm bloody raging, the total disrespect, younger ds could have walked in, not to mention teenage pregnancy.

I'm amazed at the responses to this post. It just goes to show how peoples morals differ.

I believe it is my house my rules. It is MY house, but it IS mine and my childrens home. There is a difference. I teach my children the morals that i hope will be with them for the rest of their lives.

When I turned around 15 my Father (single parent, lost my Mum to cancer at 7) decided that the best plan for his sanity and my safety was to convert and sound-proof the attic and let me do as I wished. That way he didn't know what was going on but did know that I was safe at home - he trusted me to be smart and make my own decisions and at 22 I now have a Masters, no unwanted pregnancies and my Father is my best friend.

I suggest lightening up a little but getting your son to chuck the girlfriend - if she doesn't have the decency to say hello to you in your own house she shouldn't be there.

Can I say that it is part of a parent's job to 'try to control the sexuality of a young man of 16'.
At 16 he is a boy-his physical development is probably ahead of his emotional development.
He still needs parental guidance and I think op has the right to say she would rather they didnt have sex in her house.

Actually, when you're telling a toddler or small child (not) to do something, you do often use "because I say so" as a shorthand reason. I think you have to be a very patient kind of parent not to do so. Surely we have all done it. It's especially useful where the reasons may be too complex, as yet, for them to understand.

That's not patronising towards your child - it's just realistic. Because a lot of the time, a child who asks for a "reason" is looking for something they can argue against - they want to find the chink in your armour. Now, that's not to say you can't start to introduce the reasons at a time when they are prepared to listen. It's obviously important for them to know that they shouldn't swallow golf-balls because they will die, and that they should eat fruit and vegetables because they are good for them and increase their body's resistance to illness. But you can introduce these things gradually.

In the same way, the arguments against the boundary-pushing things your teenagers wish to do need to be kept simple. Because they are more articulate and adroit and manipulative and button-pushing than a 5-year-old, they will find the weak point in your "reason" and exploit it to the full. And yes, you want to have a discussion about these things - as long as they first understand that they do as they are told.

They are still children. That's the bottom line. They may have working adult bits, and the law may say they can use them, but those facts are not necessarily pertinent.

UnquietDad - You still have not answered my question, so I'll rephrase it:

If your 16-year-old is in a loving relationship and you know he/she is despite your best entreaties going to have sex but both sets of parents have forbidden such activities under their respective roofs, where do you think they will be having sex?

The question rather presumes a few things, not least that you have got to that situation in the first place without ever having discussed it.

Hmmm UQD. I can't get past your assertion that it's 'not necessarily pertinent' that these notional teenage dc have as much legal right to be sexually active as you or I do.

I'd say that it's extremely pertinent - you can honestly disapprove of sexual activity in 16-17 year olds, & expect your view as a parent to be respected.

I don't think you can expect them to 'do as they are told', necessarily.

That's why I posed it as a hypothetical question. Hypothetical questions do make presumptions. Mine expressly assumed that you did have discussions but that the children knew of their rights and believed they were mature enough etc.

If you feel uncomfortable about answering it in respect of your hypothetical children, (who, it seems, you are confident will never have sex without your knowledge) please answer it in respect of some other hypothetical teenage couple who do not always accept that their fathers can forbid them from doing what is legal even if they can forbid them from doing so under their fathers' roofs?

Incidentally, do you ban (rather than merely discourage) your children from doing other things they are legally entitled to do, like drink when they are 18, or is it only legal sex that you take this hardline approach on?

I don't have hypothetical children, I have real children. I don't see why I should enter into an argument with a loaded, framed question.

There are all kinds of things which the law "permits" where you, as a parent, know that it is more important to have a moral conservation about these matters than to say "it's OK because it's legal."

I am trying to understand your point about not allowing your children to have sex under your roof.

It seems that you are absolutely confident that your children will not have sex without your permission and therefore that you do not have to face up to the reality of where they have sex. You say it is not a given that teenagers who are barred from having sex under their parents roofs will have sex in squalid surroundings, yet you refuse to say where you believe such children, real or hypothetical, yours or the OPs will have sex.

The OP has accepted that her son will have sex and like you she has barred him from having sex under her roof. Assuming his girlfriend's parents do the same, are you prepared to venture a guess as to where these teenagers will have sex?

I am not arguing about having a moral conversation with your children. I think that is absolutely the right and proper thing to do and from a very early age. I have also not said that you should agree with something just because it is legal. What I want to know is what happens if your teenager disagrees with you and insists (whether openly or secretly) on his/her right to do what is legal?

From what you have said on this thread, it seems your conversation with your teenager will effectively be along the lines of: "We are going to have a nice moral conversation about this issue but you should be aware that I am not really going to listen to any of the points you make. I have already made up my mind and I really don't give a toss if you disagree with me or whether what you propose to do is legal or not. 'My House, My Rules'. Unless you do as I say, [please complete this sentence as appropriate...]".

I think the OP should be banned from having sex. It's obviously the reason the 16 year old stepson is so morally corrupt as he's heard his Dad and stepmum at it like monkeybeasts on crack.

Also has the OP paid off the mortgage? In which case it is indeed her house. Otherwise it's the bank's house or the landlord's. Seeing as property rights and a boy's cock seem to be being conflated here...

Also am I the only person to think it's a bit perverted (and not in a good way) to be paying all this attention to a 16 year old boy's sex life? Like ewww man...you bare bad wid all yo hangups init.

Just because something is legal, does it make it right?
In Croatia, Turkey and Bulgaria the legal ago for drinking alcohol is 12, but therefore are you saying it's ok for your 12 yr old to get pissed.

In this country it is legal for our daughters to have an abortion without our consent. Does this make it ok? I for sure would want to know so that I can be there to support my daughter. It is right that it should be her making the decision, but not right that she does not have any support.

In Alabama USA it is legal for your 14 ytr old to marry. Does that mean they are mature enough to make the decision to definately be with that person for the rest of their life?

Again, in this country it is legal for our 16 yr old children to join the army and fight in a war. Does that mean we think they are mature enough to cope with it?

In the country is it legal for 12 yr olds to take 'meow meow' or mephedrone, a drug with ecstasy like effects. It is legal, so why do we not let all our kids do it?

I could go on and on. I for sure do not want my kids doing any of these things whether they are legal or not. I have morals, which i hope I have passed on to my children. I allow my children to do some things that are illegal, which I find more tolerable than some legal things. My son plays a video game that he is not old enough to play (but I have vetter it and have decided he can). My daughter went to a party recently and rang me to ask if should could have 1 bottle of wkd. I said yes, because she had the decency to ring me and ask, and because I knew the mother was at the house to monitor things. However, when my daughter, 14 yr old daughter had some friends over for a movie night, they all wanted to watch a 15. I asked all the girls to ring their parents to check it was ok. Two of the parents said they would prefer them not to, which was fine. None of the other girls battered an eyelid and all were happy that they then had to choose a different film.

coolfonz I find your comments particularly worrying. Infact, very worrying.

Theyoungvisiter, not getting at you, but when I said "the local bike", I meant that dh, from what he says, would be happy for her to be having sex up against a wall with each one of the local gang one after the other, after a night out. He'd be OK with her doing that at 14

To my mind, that is not simply a 'sexually active teen'. I would be, at least theoretically, happy for dd to have a loving relationship of which sex was a part so long as they were sensible etc etc etc. I have to get over my catholic upbringing, but am getting there gradually, and she's still only 10 so I have a few years left.

He wouldn't really want her to behave like that btw, but he's thinking from the pov of a young teen boy. I suspect he'll be more sensible when the time comes, and he'll get me over my vestigial catholicism and we'll all hit a happy medium.

thebeast - you are enjoying putting words in my mouth, I fear, because it's easier than addressing what I have actually said. But I didn't necessarily want to get into an argument with such loaded questions.

Completelygobsmacked and others have made the point for me - your teenager cannot "insist on their legal right" to do something. All right, they can, technically, but most of them have enough respect to know that, when they are in your house, they abide by your rules - because you, legally, have the right to throw them out.

There is an awful lot of talk about teenagers' "rights" on here and not enough about their responsibilities. You may have a right to do something in law, but conversely a responsibility not to. My wife and several friends are teachers and they see this all the time in other contexts - children banging on about what they allegedly have the "right" to do, with absolutely no concept of responsibility.

completelygobsmacked - i find your comments even more worrying than the worrisomeness I caused you from my comments. In fact twenty times as worrisome.

ps: Mephedrone is illegal.

"your teenager cannot "insist on their legal right" to do something. All right, they can..."

"My wife and several friends are teachers"

God help us all.

Hmmm...UQD, have you overlooked the fact that you too have responsibilities and not just rights. Having children is a privilege not a right.

Some posters are quick to defend their "right" to determine what happens in "their" house.

Do they want their children to live in a house only under sufferance and the threat that their parents might at any moment "throw them out" should they behave in a way that their parents, as judge and jury, arbitrarily decide is not suitable? Or do they want them to have an unconditionally loving home?

Threats and lawmaking in a very personal area are an odd way to treat any human being let alone one for whom you have taken on at least a measure of responsibility and whom you, presumably, love.

UQD saying "because I say so" to a 16 year old is both an insult to their intelligence and a poor disguise for the hypocritical cop-out from a logically indefensible position. I would not even say that to a 4 year old.

Of course legality does not fully equate with morality, and sex between 16 year olds is usually a poor idea BUT if your children have got to the stage where that is what they have decided to do then no amount of "banning" will prevent them. It will merely drive them to subterfuge, deceit and danger. You are better off on the route of talking about safe sex and being there for emotional fall out, than laying down house laws and threatening punishments.

OP Ask yourself what kind of relationship you want with your DS when he is 10 years older for he will remember how you behave now.

How many people actually throw their children out? Do you think for a minute that I would?

Anyway, why are people picking on me when this thread is evenly divided between those who think it is OK for children to have sex and those who think it isn't? I'm puzzled.

Coolfonz - thanks for the out-of-context quotes for a cheap laugh. I'm sure everybody here found them terribly amusing.

(Listens...)

Nope, thought not.

UnquietDad I agree with you that rights and responsibilities need to be discussed and taught. That is not the issue. The issue is what happens when your views on morality and the views of your teenagers diverge? You are extremely confident that your views will prevail, seemingly as a result of the extreme the consequences of disobedience.

I do hope that when your wife and her teacher friends discuss these issues, whether at school or elsewhere, they do accept as a fact that (some) 16-year-olds do have sex and that they seek to have a balanced discussion about it and do not heap moral opprobrium on those teenagers whose views they disagree with.

On the question of why you are being "picked on", some of the other posters, including the OP have made their views reasonably clear on two questions while you refuse to answer them:

1. Where do you believe 16-year-olds who have sex but are barred from having it in their parents' houses do have sex. At least the OP has made clear she doesn't care, as long as it isn't under her roof?

1. If your 16-year-olds disagree with your views and insist on having sex, what will be the consequences? Again, OP has made her views clear, you seem to believe that your children just won't have sex until you say its ok.

TheBeast, I'm not going to answer deliberately loaded questions, to which I have made clear that the answers do not start at that arbitrary point which you have chosen.

My questions only start where your continuum ends.

I am happy to have this discussion at any starting point of your choice; what I am trying to do is to take it further and find out what the consequences of following your route is.

For example, I think (but you may disagree) that the starting point is that that rights and responsibilities need to be discussed and taught. I think everybody on this thread agrees with this.

I think the next step is to discuss what happens if there is disagreement on moral issues between the parents and teenagers.
If you disagree, please feel free to say what you think the next step is.

Of coursed we agree that rights and responsibilities need to be discussed and taught. I said so above.

But I'm not playing the rest of your game, as you are one of those "paint into a corner" argument types, who are unfortunately all too prevalent on the internet...

My DD1 is 19, as soon as she was 16 I was bombarded with mothers of older teenagers telling me how stupid I was.- My DD had a steady boyfriend, Why wasnt she on the pill??.

We'd always been very open about sex, and had lots of chats. She told me she wasnt having sex and I believed her. (Reading many of the posts on here, not may of you would have!!) But I began to think I was being completely niave, maybe my DD was at it like a rabbit-everyone else thought she was!!

When I talked to her, she burst into tears. She was quite angry and wanted to know why every adult seemed to think that ever 16 year old was having sex!
She told me, she didnt feel she was ready and wanted to wait. She did wait- till she was 18.

I dont like to think about all those poor girls who are "encouraged" to go on the pill "Just in case" It makes me feel very sad for them, for their self esteem, and for all those girls who probably think, "Well my mum thinks Im having sex, so maybe I should just do it"

We are talking about 16 year old here. Some might be ready, many arent.

Dont attack a parent for wanting to protecting their DC.