When do you stop vetting your child’s book choices?

[PinotAndPlaydough]

Interested to hear when parent leave their kids to it and just let them read what they want.

I’ve read some articles saying that vetting reading can be counterproductive and it benefits children to read what they want and then in the flip side there is lots with parents up in arms that their 8 year child has got hold of a Jacquline Wilson book.

My daughter (10) is an avid reader and wants to read adult books (such as Stephen king) she’s autistic so some adult themes she just wouldn’t understand and she doesn’t scare easily, but then again I don’t want her reading books with any graphic sex scenes, rape etc.

It’s a bloody minefield at this age, her reading level is much higher than her age. So what’s everyone’s view on this?

[tedgran]

Let her read what she wants, my parents never censored anything I read. I let my children read what they wanted.

[TrillianMurphy]

I read "The Color Purple" when I was 11. There's rape on the very first page of that.
I think I've turned out alright.
I think stifling a child's choice might put them off reading for good.
Saying this, my DC is only 2 so I don't know how I'll feel about this when they're older.

[MakkaPakkas]

I've never vetted my children's reading choices aside from choosing whether to buy the book or not. I do have a wall of books of my own they can (and don't) choose anything from. Surely your DD can stop reading if she's not into the book?

[yikesanotherbooboo]

I never vetted my children's reading and am of an age where books weren't restricted. There weren't really any books aimed at teenagers , or certainly very few, so one moved from Laura Ingalls wilder,noel Stretfeild and the like to Agatha Christie and Georgette Heyer.As long as your child is choosing from a range of books eg at the library or by thumbing through at the bookshop they are likely to make choices appropriate for their reading age and developmental stage. They will gloss over bits that they don't understand.

[PinotAndPlaydough]

This is the view I’m leaning towards, my mum had no idea what I was reading and like all of you I turned out fine. I have hundreds and hundred of books she could read but horror really isn’t my thing and it’s thrown me slightly!

[Echobelly]

Don't think I've every vetted it really - sometimes we've encouraged DS to read slightly more challenging things than he bothers to (because he can), but generally my belief is you let them read whatever they're interested in.

[cherryonthecakes]

My parents had no clue I was reading Virginia Andrews in early secondary and had nicked my dad's Stephen King books by 10. I'm fine

[LittleDiaries]

Never vetted any books, and nor did my parents. I read whatever I wanted to read.

[IceandIndigo]

I generally think kids should be allowed to read what they want, but I read Stephen King as a young teen and found some of the books so disturbing, to this day I regret reading them. So I would probably try to steer her away from that particular author until she’s a bit older. There are plenty of good YA horror novels out there.

[Svara]

Never stopped DS reading anything. He chose from the YA section from age 8, starting with books like Percy Jackson and moving onto books aimed at older teenagers as he had read all the younger books he was interested in by age 10. Read some adult sci fi and fantasy from age 10 as well. Still doesn't like graphic violence, torture, rape at almost 16 so just avoids books like that or skims over the odd disturbing section.

[Scarby9]

@yikesanotherbooboo
I went from Laura Ingalls Wilder (still love those books!) to Agatha Christie, then to James Bond. Now those books really were unsuitable for a 12 year old (although much of the inappropriate sexual stuff went right over my head) but I was obsessed with them for several years - could have done Mastermind on the series.
No censorship for me, and I was and am an avid reader.

[Aroundtheworldin80moves]

I have once put aside a book until DD was older... (funnily enough a Jacqueline Wilson) but she was 6, very sensitive and about Child abuse. She had bought it at the school bookshop and it was mixed in with some of the milder JW books. She read it at 9.

Now they are 9&10 I trust they can put aside a book if they realise its not for them. The younger one likes a lot more gory stuff than the elder.

[MajorCarolDanvers]

I have never vetted their choices.

[RandomDent]

Oh those Virginia Andrews books! They really were trash, weren’t they? A fabulous read though, I had them all as a young teen.

[TheSnowyOwl]

I wouldn’t vet but I would say upfront that some genres such as horror or psychological crime might be very detailed.

[EV117]

I’d vet in the same way I do films. I don’t see the difference. I know some are 15/18 certificate but from about 14 I don’t think it generally matters too much, although it may depend on the child and their level of maturity and the subject matter. But I wouldn’t want my 10 year old reading a rape scene anymore than I’d want them to watch one tbh. I wouldn’t want my 9 year old reading violent and gory horror any more than I’d want them to watch it. I don’t see how films are so closely vetted by many, even music with swearing and violent or sexual themes, yet books are apparently a free for all when it comes to subject matter.

[actiongirl1978]

I've never vetted books and quite often find DD have a root around my bookshelf.

I went from. Sweet valley high to Stephen King and Virginia Andrews. As long as a child is reading, that's a good thing.

[CircusBaby]

My parents didn't censor anything, and I've never vetted what my children read. They've always been free to choose their own reading material.

[mathanxiety]

I vetted until about age 11-12.

I don't think kids are able to process themes aimed at older readers, and there is plenty of fantastic and developmentally appropriate children's and YA lit available these days to ease them into adult literature.

I remember coming across Mutually Assured Destruction as a child with unfettered access to a house full of books and publications. I'm not advocating a childhood sheltered completely from reality, but I do believe some themes and facts of life can wait and should wait.

[AllThingsServeTheBeam]

My eldesDS is 10. I was never vetted but my parents didn't really read the books I do. I don't think I'd be comfortable with him reading some of SK or for example the author I am reading now, Mo Hayder.

[Timeforabiscuit]

I vet for my kids 12 and 14, they can read most things but I draw the line at Lolita, American psycho and the road. To be fair they probably wouldn't pick them up anyway, probably...

[RedskyThisNight]

Our books were all from the library and anything in the children's section is aimed at under 12s I think? So there wasn't a concern that they would pick up anything too awful. and by the time they were 12/13 I was happy for them to read whatever (although actually 12/13 was when they both stopped reading, although DD started again at age 15).

[JaninaDuszejko]

If a young child has an advanced reading age then that doesn't mean they should read adult books with adult themes, it means they should be directed towards books with more complex language like many of the children's classics rather than offered inappropriate books. Having said that I think that by the time a child can go into Waterstones by themselves and buy a book they can read what they want. Like a PP I read The Color Purple as a young teenager and To Kill a Mockingbird was my favourite book at that age (although I also loved Virginia Andrews).

[JaninaDuszejko]

Also my Mum was at boarding school and the school distributed a list of 'inappropriate books for young ladies' with predictable consequences so she never censored my reading as a teenager so I'm not going to censor the DCs reading as teenagers

[WlNDMlLL]

Apart from the Girls in Love series, surely most JW books (Tracy Beaker, The Suitcase Kid, The Lottie Project etc) are very much aimed at 8 year olds? They might not discuss lovely middle class lives but that's the point.