Poll: 12 year old girl wins case against dear old Dad for grounding...

[Taniquel]

Just another example of how kids today think that they are "entitled" to any and everything without working for it. How are the future parents (us) going to be able to raise responsible members of society with precidents like this case floating around. The ability to disciple a child is essential to teaching them right from wrong when they cannot understand the abstract concepts of other people's feelings and responsibility for one's own actions. Personally, I was grounded (A LOT) and suffered no ill effects from it except an ability to read a whole book in a few hours.

I thought I could not loose any more faith in humanity after the man getting trampled to death at Walmart on Black Friday, but this shows me an all new low.

 

[Zer_]

Ask yourself what was going in in that kid's head when she first approached the family lawyer? I'd bet 50 bucks it was something along the lines of "Daddy can't ground me for this! Daddy is stupid and won't let me go on the trip."

That's not news canon, that's journalism wanking.

It is an assumption, you're right. It is an assumption based on how I used to think when I was 12, and how everyone I knew used to think at that age. We did bad things, and when we'd get caught we were angry at our parents, not ourselves. We knew we were wrong but we didn't care.

 

[Swordsponge]

The fact that the child brought the court case against her father for a completely inane reason is grounds for disowning, at least.

Um, no--she's *twelve*: if you hold something a twelve year old does to you against her--in the middle of a divorce, no less--you don't have the emotional maturity to be a parent.

...I don't understand your logic. Because she's twelve and going through "rough times," it's okay?
I expect someone who is twelve to be responsible for their actions, period. If they're not capable, maybe my emotional maturity isn't what should be called into question here.

EDIT: And again, I would never, ever have kids.
Ever.

No, my logic is that when a 12 year old, especially going through "rough times" does something you don't like, that even if it isn't "okay" you don't judge them by the same standard you judge everyone else by because *she's just a kid* and

1) we don't make children pay for their transgressions as harshly as adults;

2) we don't saddle children with penalties for their transgressions that affect them as harshly in the future as we would adults because we see childhood as a period where even good people will make mistakes;

3) we take mitigating circumstances into greater consideration when it comes to children because we know they don't have the emotional maturity to deal with "rough times";

and most importantly

4) we forgive our children because...they're our children! That's the kind of love a parent should have for a child.

a rough time okay but by the time the kids that old she should know better. my parnets lets me pretty much do whatever i wanted by the time i was 12. the only rules i had was i had to stay in school and if i went to jail it was my ass. have fun dont get cought all my mom would tell me i still love her for it.

 

[Zer_]

1) we don't make children pay for their transgressions as harshly as adults;

Agreed, she wasn't sent to prison for what she did was she?

2) we don't saddle children with penalties for their transgressions that affect them as harshly in the future as we would adults because we see childhood as a period where even good people will make mistakes;

But we still need to teach our children right from wrong. Not only that but we need to teach them that doing the wrong thing has consequences. Also, good adults also make mistakes, the difference between a kid and an adult is an adult *should be* learning from mistakes.

3) we take mitigating circumstances into greater consideration when it comes to children because we know they don't have the emotional maturity to deal with "rough times";

That still doesn't make rough times a valid excuse for doing something wrong or stupid. There's a reason adults are able to deal with rough times, and that's because parents raise them as such.

4) we forgive our children because...they're our children! That's the kind of love a parent should have for a child.

Sure, forgiveness is a great thing. The problem is that if we punish a child by banning them from computers for a week and cave in half-way there the kid learns that they can manipulate their parents to reduce punishments or cut them short. Especially when it comes to repeated offenses on a child's part, I think leniency would then be detrimental to the child as opposed to constructive.

 

[Zer_]

1) we don't make children pay for their transgressions as harshly as adults;

Agreed, she wasn't sent to prison for what she did was she?

Um, these were responses to a poster saying "The fact that the child brought the court case against her father for a completely inane reason is grounds for disowning, at least." My response was to someone saying what action the father should take *now* against the child in response for bringing the court case. I think you got confused as to what I was responding to.

My parents threatened me to the streets many times and it worked. If I was being a little prick making a fuss in a store my mother would say "Let's go." and leave me there. I was never far behind.

 

[Sewer Rat]

Wow... Just wow... Thats all I can say for such a retarded case...

 

[cappp]

Seriously, read the ruling before throwing uninformed opinions out there. All the facts are covered and explained. The child lives with her mother but the father was arguing his status as pseudo-guardian, and therefore his opinion as to whether the child could go on the trip in question, trumped all those of her mother. The question was one about how to establish which parent in their specific instance was empowered to restrict or enable certain behaviours.

Skip down to the section labelled ?Implementation Context? for the details as they were presented to the court. I?ve gone ahead and run it through google-translation for English readers.

http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=hp&hl=en&js=n&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.canlii.org%2Ffr%2Fqc%2Fqcca%2Fdoc%2F2009%2F2009qcca623%2F2009qcca623.html&sl=fr&tl=en

As I said before, the real issues at stake here are those related to journalistic integrity and the problem of the internet as a credible source.

 

[zirnitra]

hmm, it's a difficult case, as one parent was still consenting for the child to go, even though it was the father who had custody I'm surprised this doesn't happen more often with things like one divorced parent not wanting the child to get their ears pierced and the other not having a problem with it and them letting them get it done in their time with the child etc.

I think ultimately I side with the court on this matter especially if the trip was during the mother's time with the child. the fact that it was the mother who gave consent suggests that the father was against it in the first place and the grounding issue was just an excuse to justify it to the judge.

right to be honest all you people screaming about the 'tyrant girl' doing this, it was most probably the mother who hired the lawyer and not the 12 year old girl.

 

[Zombie_Fish]

What is a 6th grader doing posting innapropriate images on the internet anyway? I'm pretty sure that would be (Or should be) illegal anyway, but sueing someone over not letting them go to a graduation trip just stupidly over the top.

It's like a case I once heard about where a truck driver crashed his truck whilst driving down an icy road, and then sued the council for "Not putting enough grit on the road."

 

[McNinja]

Good Lord this is rediculous. If this were my kid, I would send them off to the other parents house and not let the kid back into my house. Why? Because the kid now knows that within the confines of [b/]MY[/b] house, SHE does NOT have to obey [b/]MY[/b] rules because she now knows that I don't have the power to tell her what to do.

You know what I think? I think the Mother is extremely happy with her child for making her ex-husband look like a fool. I cannot wait for that mentality to backfire when the kid thinks they don't have to obey the mother because, shoot, they didn't obey the father and they got away with it, why do they have to obey the mother?

And Cheeze_Pavillion, kids cost lots and lots of money, and lots and lots of time, and lots and lots of energy. You put a roof over their head, feed them, attempt to raise them well, and they turn around and SUE YOU (which probably cost thousands of dollars in court costs, escpecially with all the appeals) for a simple little discpliary action.

That girl, if not taught by her mother, is going to grow up spoiled rotten, and will live the rest of her life thinking she can do whatever she wants.

 

[FallenRainbows]

Disown her, we'll see how she likes total freedom.

Seriously. If this were my kid, I'd just be like, "You don't wanna follow my orders? Fine, fuck you. Go live on the street - I hear rape is the new 'how do you do?'"

Hmmm, I like the way you think... *sharpens rusty shovel*

I can't take any credit - I was inspired by you.
I'm serious, though. If I ever accidentally have a kid, (and it would be an accident, especially if it survived the abortions,) it would never disobey me.
Ever. I would strike fear into its' very soul.

Your back, and as morbid as ever, good.

And I might do what this girl did hehe.

 

[Gestapo Hunter]

this just show that its not worth having kids anymore