Should Parents Have to Pay a FIne of up to $500

I missed your last discussion, so I'll try to look it up. Here's what I think. All over the world, all parents MUST be given back their parental rights. PERIOD It is a ridiculous pattern all over the world to take away more and more of our parental rights, and at the same time immediately label and punish us as bad parents when our kids do not behave. They can't have it both ways. When they undermine our authority over our own children, the children know they can do whatever they want -- and many of them will. Also, when parental rights and authority are restored, and parents have trouble managing their child, they need support, not fines and harassment, unless it can be PROVEN beyond a shadow of a doubt that they have neglected their parental duties by having no rules, disregarding past bed behavior (not taking action to punish/discipline), failing to attempt to get psychiatric/medical intervention, etc. But this proof has to be real. It is too easy for the system to malign parents who are having real struggles with seriously troubled kids when they should be given support.

Hi Sandy, I read and re read this but got puzzled with 1 a.m. If it is 1 am it would be a night time and children remain indoor during this hour is natural and there is no point of imposing curfew or the like. Would you kindly clarify this?

I think that they should have to prove that the parents knew it. Kids sneak all the time. Parents cannot always be watching over their shoulder. I think the time is just asking for trouble.

What I want to know is why should a parent be held accountable for what their kid does.I have been there and getting ready to do it again.I have two sons that were teenagers and I have a daughter that is twelve.You tell your teenager to be home at certain time.Maybe 40% of time they will listen.You ground them take privleges away from them.They don't care after you go to bed they wait till you fall asleep then they sneak quietly out the front door or sneak out their bedroom window. This person who wants this law put thru reminds me of how a police man was thinking here years ago.When my boys were kids the oldest one had problems in school and he was seeing a therapist.I had a treatment done on a leg that I hurt.The treatment made my leg numb for 20 to 24 hours.The therapist told me that if anything occured call the police to come talk to my son because he was going out of town for a conference.My son started being mean and rough towards my other son and he would not listen.I tried to get up and almost fell.I called the police and an officer was sent out.When he got there he did not talk to my son instead he told me that if I was hurt and unable to control my kids then I need to put them in foster care.I explained to him that was only till about lunchtime the next day,then I could feel my leg.He said that he did not care If I was a responsible parent then I would have taken them to CPF before I had the cortizone shot in my foot.He also told me that he was reporting me to CPF and that if the police are ever called to my house again(which this was the first and only time) he would be in court and make sure that my kids were taken away from me and that he would testify that I was an unfit mother and that I was arrested.

This reminds me of the school law that Missouri has...if your child skips school too often, the parent goes to jail. I don't see how that's teaching the kid a lesson, it's only punishing the parent for their kids behavior and encouraging the kids not to take responsibility for their actions. Also I don't see any reason why a kid under the age of 16 is out past 10pm...and if they are allowed to leave home at 13 then they should be responsible for their own curfew...not the parents. [b]~~AT PEACE WITHIN~~ **STAND STRONG IN YOUR BELIEFS**[/b]

I can understand wanting to find a solution to this problem, but I think this idea is too far in general. First, parents can't always be held responsible for teens. This has already been mentioned in the above comment, so I'll leave it at that. But second, why should you have to have a curfew at 17 years of age? I understand that situations are bad, but I think it's ridiculous to limit teenagers like that. Not everyone's irresponsible. Of course, I really don't know anything about the situation there. I know that around here (United States) in the areas that I've lived in, 1 would be way too early a curfew. Most of the town is still awake at 1 and it's not that unreasonable. There are gangs and crap, but most teenagers are just out having fun. I think 15 is a reasonable age, though. Anything past that is going too far. I mean, I moved out of my house when I was 17, so there was no way I was going to follow a curfew, period. I've always been responsible and there have only been a couple times that I haven't been home by one, but still. It should be my decision to make either way. Plus, I would tend to stray away from anything subjective like parents being deemed unfit. That tends to be an opinion, and one that I really don't trust to governments. After all, those parents that named their child "Talula does the hula" were deemed unfit and the state forced them to change her name, which is silly. She can easily go by Talula, which is a regular name for the area and the rest is more like a middle name. And if she really hated it that much, she can go by a different name. I know lots of people that do. And when she gets older she can change it. Where does the state get off regulating these things? Oh dear, I fear I got off on a tangent on that one. xD Sorry about that, it's getting late. Anyway, I think it's good that they're making steps to try to protect the kids and everything, but it's basically a proven fact in history that laws like this just don't work. People are going to do it anyway.

i have a mixed feeling about this... i know that a parent should not be punished for their children's actions... but at the same time they also have the obligations and responsibilities to teach and discipline their children... if they neglect their duties, then i believe they have to be punished... but if they already do what they can to educate the child and the child is the rebellious type, then i think it is the child who should be punished and not the parents... may be putting the child in juvenile or corrective center or even jail works better rather than giving a fine to the parents... take care and have a nice day...

It is a difficult situation indeed! I don't think in MOST cases it is unreasonable to fine the parents. The problem is that the parents who would be the ones to get fined are the ones who do not care. The children must bear some of the consequence. Why will they care - in the extreme cases- if the parents pay $500? the kids need to learn responsibility even if the parents are not responsible. That's the weak link here.. irresponsble parents... the ones who raise irresponsible children... and we all pay for that!