Underage Rioters - should the parents be held responsible?

[Flash In The Pan]

Many of those shown rioting and looting in English cities over the last few days have been children (for the purposes of this poll under 16 years of age), should the parents be held responsible and punished for the actions of their offspring?

 

[KIPAX]

Many of those shown rioting and looting in English cities over the last few days have been children (for the purposes of this poll under 16 years of age), should the parents be held responsible and punished for the actions of their offspring?

yes! if any of my kids did something so bad i would feel i had failed in my role as a parent.. But there are other infulences such as school who spend more time wiht kids than parents do..

I know full well my lads will get in bother here and there.. if a lad is out with a load of mates and they decide on the spare of the moment to do X,Y,Z then its near impossible for one to say he is going home .. I was young I understand that .. but i hope if the situation was as serious as organised looting and mayhem then mine would ahve the good sense to stay away.

 

[akr]

What would the punishment be? Fine them, lock them up? What would that achieve? Personally I've had enough of us always looking to blame other people for people's actions. Everyone, including children, should take responsibility for their own actions.

Of course there is a point at which children should not be out at night - I'm not sure what age you decide that is but certainly an 11 year old should not be walking the streets without an adult at 11pm. I'd have thought that should be dealt with however through whatever child neglect procedures exist (and I have no idea what they are).

We're assuming that this children who are out doing that are doing so as a result of bad parenting, which will be the case is some cases, and not in others.

I'd vote maybe dependant on the circumstances and the punishment. I think I may be alone on this one though.

 

[John Hendry]

yes! if any of my kids did something so bad i would feel i had failed in my role as a parent.. But there are other infulences such as school who spend more time wiht kids than parents do..

I know full well my lads will get in bother here and there.. if a lad is out with a load of mates and they decide on the spare of the moment to do X,Y,Z then its near impossible for one to say he is going home .. I was young I understand that .. but i hope if the situation was as serious as organised looting and mayhem then mine would ahve the good sense to stay away.

Yes make them pay for it, all of them should have to pay for the damage sell off there stuff

 

[Flash In The Pan]

The point has just been raised during PMQ....

 

[KIPAX]

What would the punishment be?

massive difficult question..

I know if your child doesnt turn up at school the parents get fined at first then worse...or that used to be the case

We're assuming that this children who are out doing that are doing so as a result of bad parenting, which will be the case is some cases, and not in others.

If the child lives at home with parents and then goes out on organised looting sprees at night then the parents have to take some responsability IMHO and I dont see how they cant be held responsible...

I'd vote maybe dependant on the circumstances and the punishment. I think I may be alone on this one though.

No you not .. there must be some odd cases.. you cant blanket rule on everyhting... I was answering the question as a...well as in most cases... we cant envisage them all on here

 

[Catdaddy]

I'd vote maybe dependant on the circumstances and the punishment. I think I may be alone on this one though.

No, you're not alone - each case would need to be determined on its own merits. Kipax got it right when he said that peer pressure can be a very strong influence, and I know full well that if one of my kids were to do something like what's gone on, it certainly wouldn't be through any sort of encouragement from me!

 

[Flash In The Pan]

We're assuming that this children who are out doing that are doing so as a result of bad parenting, which will be the case is some cases, and not in others.

Surely that's just a convenient "get-out" clause though? I'm sure many, if not all, that could be viewed as bad parents don't consider themselves to be so...

 

[KIPAX]

We have to recognise the difference between a spare of the moment action brought upon by peer preassure... and organised prepared actions such as looting.. neither are acceptable ....but as a parent one is understandable and mostly out of a parents control (but still punishable) the latter is for me the way the parent has brough up there child and as such should be held reponsible in some way.

 

[akr]

Surely that's just a convenient "get-out" clause though? I'm sure many, if not all, that could be viewed as bad parents don't consider themselves to be so...

Well it is a get out in terms of not having a blanket 'all parents of those caught are responsible'.

What are you measuring who is a good parent and who is not a good parent? You could take the view, that I would have some sympathy for, that if you let your child out whilst all that was going you were irresponsible.

Are we suggesting that parents should be held responsible for any crime a child commits, because I'd see no logical reason to limit it to rioting. :shrug:

Most of these children are old enough to know right from wrong, and they opted for the latter and should face the consequences.

 

[Flash In The Pan]

Are we suggesting that parents should be held responsible for any crime a child commits, because I'd see no logical reason to limit it to rioting. :shrug:

In essence, yes. The onus should be on the parents to ensure their children aren't out committing criminal acts.

 

[Chris Primadona]

Yes and no for me, I can see how some of these kids can just be outside the parents control. Sending some of these scum kids to the naughty corner, taking away the psp, phone or grounding them etc just won't cut it. If you clip them around the ear, or lock them in a room so they don't go out and riot you could get jailed yourself.
On the other hand, some of these parents just don't care and have never made the effort to punish or guide their kids. Some kind of punishment under those circumstances might work. I wouldn't like to sort through that and make a decision on who deserves to be punished though. :shrug:

 

[gembobs]

I voted yes.

However, I think if a parent drags or reports their child to the police and hands them in (so to speak), then they should face a lesser punishment than the parents who just sit at home not bothering about any of it, and thereby saying the behaviour is acceptable.

 

[Ste Manns]

Of course they should be. When you have a child you are responsible for them and their actions. I'm not suggesting the parents should go to jail for something their children have done, but there should be some 'punishment' given.

Too many slippery shoulders these days. The parents involved in all of this have failed to bring their kids up properly, they haven't taught right from wrong and there should be some repercussion for this. There will always be some who try their very best but in the end their offspring don't respond and 'go bad' however the majority of the parents of these rioting kids have failed to do a proper job. There is no excuse for this - poverty? Lack of opportunity? Pathetic. I'm not well off but my daughter is being brought up correctly. I never had much opportunity growing up (very little if I'm honest) but my parents worked hard to make sure me and my siblings were good kids. Just because I wasn't born with a silver spoon in my mouth doesn't mean it was ok for me to be bad. Lack of money is not a valid excuse for the rioters actions OR their parents lack of responsibility.

 

[Forbiddenbiker]

Yes but if you hold the parents responsible then it also follows that they can hold their parents responsible ..and so on.


Society is responsible.

 

[wontolla]

Yes but if you hold the parents responsible then it also follows that they can hold their parents responsible ..and so on.


Society is responsible.

In some cases, it is generations of parents who are responsible for offsprings bad behaviour, so yes, they can hold them responsible.

Just who is 'society'? Yes, correct, parents for the most part!

 

[Chris Primadona]

.
Society is responsible.

I disagree, the PERSON is responsible, everything else is an excuse imo.

 

[canonrebel]

I blame the Bleeding Heart liberals, the youth of today are the offspring of the generation who were in school when corporal punishment was banned and teachers/heads could no longer cane or punish individuals who did wrong, this then passed down to parents who could no longer smack their own child when they did wrong. If a kid can see that he can get away without being punished then he will continue to do it, which IMHO just exaserbates the problem and has led to a generation of people who now have no respect for authority and they are now bringing up children with the same values.

 

[Ste Manns]

Society is responsible.

Apologies for bluntness, but that's utter twaddle.

Your child is your responsibility. Surely you wouldn't disagree with that? Hence you are responsible for your child.

To say society is responsible is like saying its no ones fault, and attitudes like that are what has led us to this broken society.

 

[TriggerHappy]

I blame the Bleeding Heart liberals, the youth of today are the offspring of the generation who were in school when corporal punishment was banned and teachers/heads could no longer cane or punish individuals who did wrong, this then passed down to parents who could no longer smack their own child when they did wrong. If a kid can see that he can get away without being punished then he will continue to do it, which IMHO just exaserbates the problem and has led to a generation of people who now have no respect for authority and they are now bringing up children with the same values.

Blame the liberals if you want. It's a pretty sad state of affairs when people are unable to convey the rights and wrongs of society without the use of violence - yes, violence - to illustrate the wrongs. A good parent/teacher is more than capable of punishing a child in a way that teaches them a lesson of what they did wrong without also teaching them that it's acceptable to hit people when they perceive them to have done wrong.

 

[whatdoesthisbutt]

I agree wholeheartedly.
Just because little Jimmy has gone off the rails might not be as a result of your parenting, but if You cant sort it out then its your responsibility to see that Jimmy gets the guidance he requires

 

[Forbiddenbiker]

In some cases, it is generations of parents who are responsible for offsprings bad behaviour, so yes, they can hold them responsible.

Just who is 'society'? Yes, correct, parents for the most part!

Society is manipulated by those actively taking part, the ripples of their actions and discussions construct the society of the future.
Our present is constructed by our ancestors and their passed actions, but not by the parents of today’s rioters.

They are irresponsible parents but should we as the rest of society blame them entirely and hold them fully responsible when we openly admit that our parents and their parents also failed to solve the 'underclass' problem.

That’s like just bulling just for the sake of easing our frustration isn't it? I mean lets not try and undo anything or even explain it to ourselves, lets just shout and scream at them and make them pay...that'll do for now, its a complicated world and we can't be bothered right. ...

I disagree, the PERSON is responsible, everything else is an excuse imo.

yes I do understand, accountability is everything..

But we are only human, and society as a whole must take the Burdon of an idividuals inadequacies in a bid to learn and improve our own awareness... that’s an essential part of our insatiable appetite for knowledge and a good Life right…. Would we prefer to be ignorant, bliss as that might be?

 

[canonrebel]

Blame the liberals if you want. It's a pretty sad state of affairs when people are unable to convey the rights and wrongs of society without the use of violence - yes, violence - to illustrate the wrongs. A good parent/teacher is more than capable of punishing a child in a way that teaches them a lesson of what they did wrong without also teaching them that it's acceptable to hit people when they perceive them to have done wrong.

I did not mean the Liberal Party, but the liberal minded who came up with all the stupid laws that removed authority from the very people who we rely on to teach children the rights and wrongs in society

 

[Forbiddenbiker]

Apologies for bluntness, but that's utter twaddle.

Your child is your responsibility. Surely you wouldn't disagree with that? Hence you are responsible for your child.

To say society is responsible is like saying its no ones fault, and attitudes like that are what has led us to this broken society.

Missed this ...No that’s fine the way you've put it. I voted yes btw ..choices where slim though.

Id suggest its the quick lynching attitudes of us all that ignore the crux of the problem which has lead us to a fragmented and morally confused society we have today. …its all judgment and reaction

Yes, my child is my responsibility to teach good moral codes to I agree, but as a parent I can only pass on my own moral code and teach him the world as I see it, if my view is flawed I’m simply passing on rubbish ideals however righteous I might feel about them..

None of us are the perfect parent, but together the sum becomes greater than the whole and in essence society is the sum and its guidance and moral code is the reference for all of our own moral decisions.... we can only look at our peers for confirmation right, what else have we. (I’ve put stuff in the other Tottenham thread about our society today.. kinda talking across two threads here so excuse me if I’m confusing guys)



Society wise I don't think things are as bad as we'd like to imagine, sometimes a new seed and growth springs from the ashes so to speak. I found the solidarity of clean up and general mixed race love and respect of being a Londoner very uplifting and a reminder of a bygone era. Plus now we're all very clearly aware of our angry youth, not that we'd forgotten, but it has clearly seeded a new chapter in our knowledge of our own societies inadequacies I feel.

 

[ding76uk]

I did not mean the Liberal Party, but the liberal minded who came up with all the stupid laws that removed authority from the very people who we rely on to teach children the rights and wrongs in society

What the ability to hit children? A good teacher can control children through other methods.

If you rule through fear, you lose the one thing that people are likely to work on which is respect.

 

[Matt]

What the ability to hit children? A good teacher can control children through other methods.

If you rule through fear, you lose the one thing that people are likely to work on which is respect.

Unfortunately there are not a lot of people who can do that. I respected all of my teachers, they were firm but fair, and excellent shots with board rubbers.

 

[onona]

Blame the liberals if you want. It's a pretty sad state of affairs when people are unable to convey the rights and wrongs of society without the use of violence - yes, violence - to illustrate the wrongs. A good parent/teacher is more than capable of punishing a child in a way that teaches them a lesson of what they did wrong without also teaching them that it's acceptable to hit people when they perceive them to have done wrong.

I totally agree with this. Where I grew up, corporal punishment was legal for most of my schooling and frankly I find it absolutely abhorrent. Why an adult would find it necessary and justifiable to use a weapon on a child who has been naughty is something I simply can't get my head around, and absolutely condemn. Furthermore, violence simply teaches a child to anticipate a painful consequence, it doesn't teach them why what they've done is wrong. My parents used to hit me when I was a young kid, and I never really learned any valuable lessons from it, I just ended up with a lot of bitter and hurtful memories.

It's absolutely possible to discipline a child without physical violence.

To answer the question of the thread itself, I'd say yes and no. Yes, a parent has a responsibility to raise their child properly, but on the other hand, no parent has, or should be expected to have, 100% control over their kid 100% of the time. That's just not realistic.

Having said that, I've always found it a tad absurd that we need to obtain licenses for things like driving a car or owning a dog, yet having sprogs is a free for all. There are so many people who really, really shouldn't have children.

 

[akr]

I totally agree with this. Where I grew up, corporal punishment was legal for most of my schooling and frankly I find it absolutely abhorrent. Why an adult would find it necessary and justifiable to use a weapon on a child who has been naughty is something I simply can't get my head around, and absolutely condemn. Furthermore, violence simply teaches a child to anticipate a painful consequence, it doesn't teach them why what they've done is wrong. My parents used to hit me when I was a young kid, and I never really learned any valuable lessons from it, I just ended up with a lot of bitter and hurtful memories.

It's absolutely possible to discipline a child without physical violence.

To answer the question of the thread itself, I'd say yes and no. Yes, a parent has a responsibility to raise their child properly, but on the other hand, no parent has, or should be expected to have, 100% control over their kid 100% of the time. That's just not realistic.

Having said that, I've always found it a tad absurd that we need to obtain licenses for things like driving a car or owning a dog, yet having sprogs is a free for all. There are so many people who really, really shouldn't have children.

We run training classes at our work for adults, I think we're going to bring in the cane for those people who insist on using their mobiles during the class, as they show a distinct lack of respect.

 

[littlemonster]

Argh... for me it's not clear cut. Like it or no, a 15 year old who decides to do something, sometimes the parents aren't going to be able to stop it. People don't magically become responsible on their 16th birthday, and some 15 year olds (lads especially) may well be bigger than either parent, it may not be possible for them to physically stop them. You know, even if when they did they couldn't be done for child abuse...

On the other hand an 8 year old is still a relatively young child, and if you can't control your 8 year old properly, then you should be thinking you're doing something wrong!

Legally in the UK, the age of criminal responsibility is 10 years old - below that it's all considered to be their parents at fault, above they can be charged independently.


And while upbringing does play a role, like it or no it's not the only thing that will effect somebody's behaviour. So no, the parents can't always be held responsible. And for what it's worth... I'd be more worried about those kids whose mothers are standing around drinking with them in prams in the park, swearing and all who give their kid a wollop if it cries, than someone who's a more normal example of a parent who chooses not to smack their kid. I don't think lack of being allowed to beat kids with sticks is the issue...

 

[Deleted member 29733]

There was a guy on the BBC News last night and he said "What can I do, tie him to his bed....I am not allowed to do that. Forcibly restrain him from going out....I am not allowed to do that. Lock him in his room....(you guessed it) I'm not allowed to do that either.

So he felt that his hands were tied and apart from shouting at him he was powerless to stop him from going out.

When I was a kid if you got into trouble at school or in the street you were terrified of going home because you knew you were going to get it in the neck from your parents as well....and rightly so.

 

[onona]

There was a guy on the BBC News last night and he said "What can I do, tie him to his bed....I am not allowed to do that. Forcibly restrain him from going out....I am not allowed to do that. Lock him in his room....(you guessed it) I'm not allowed to do that either.

A parent who feels they need to do this to their child has already failed at parenting.

 

[Deleted member 29733]

A parent who feels they need to do this to their child has already failed at parenting.

Yes, I can see where you are coming from. If my dad had told me I wasn't going out then I wasn't going out end of story. But there again I respected my parents and still do. My dad is now 90.

 

[ding76uk]

A parent who feels they need to do this to their child has already failed at parenting.

No. A child has peers, who in teenagers have far more influence over children that there parents. If children rebel there is in some cases little the parent can do. We see it at school. Children who turn bad, parents fully supportive doing everything they can, doesn't make a difference, child still carries on his path.

I am worried that so many are advocating power over people through fear. The issue is that respect is lost, and when they realise they have little to fear then you have lost them full stop. I see 14 year old boys, 6ft 2 and about 15 stone. Now what chance have you got of ruling that child through fear? Hitting them will do no good. Same as the cane never did. Mark of honour. I have seen a headmaster rarely have to raise his voice in 5 years, had complete respect of all students in the school and even the bad kids respected him enough never to lie to him and rarely did they play up with him. I have also seen someone shout and scream at children and try to rule a school through fear of crossing them or daring to be naughty. Guess which one worked better?

 

[Deleted member 29733]

I was never ruled by fear. I had nothing to fear from my parents, as I said before I respected them and still do.

I was brought up to know the difference between right and wrong. Even when my mates used to say they were going to do something, if I didn't want to do it then I wouldn't. Yes I had peer pressure they would say Oh your chicken, coward, scared, but it takes more courage to walk away than to follow like sheep.

 

[photon]

but it takes more courage to walk away than to follow like sheep.

But most people are sheep. My father was stationed at Bergen-Belsen after WWII and the locals suffered selective blindness over what was going on nearby, during the Nazi regime. Look at Milgram's well-known experiment when an authority figure coerces an ordinary person into administering electric shocks...

 

[Deleted member 29733]

But there's coercion and coercion. If my mates said we're going rioting you coming, then I would have said no thanks and gone home. BUT, if one had pulled a gun and stuck it against my head and said they were going rioting AND your coming then I would have gone for my own safety.

There was a woman in Manchester who went to court. She was a care worker with a 2 yr old child. She was charged with receiving stolen goods. They found 4 large flat screen TV's in her home. Her solicitor told the court that she would lose her job, could lose her home and her child could be taken into care....well she should have thought of that.

 

[u8myufo]

Argh... for me it's not clear cut. Like it or no, a 15 year old who decides to do something, sometimes the parents aren't going to be able to stop it. People don't magically become responsible on their 16th birthday, and some 15 year olds (lads especially) may well be bigger than either parent, it may not be possible for them to physically stop them. You know, even if when they did they couldn't be done for child abuse...

On the other hand an 8 year old is still a relatively young child, and if you can't control your 8 year old properly, then you should be thinking you're doing something wrong!

Legally in the UK, the age of criminal responsibility is 10 years old - below that it's all considered to be their parents at fault, above they can be charged independently.


And while upbringing does play a role, like it or no it's not the only thing that will effect somebody's behaviour. So no, the parents can't always be held responsible. And for what it's worth... I'd be more worried about those kids whose mothers are standing around drinking with them in prams in the park, swearing and all who give their kid a wollop if it cries, than someone who's a more normal example of a parent who chooses not to smack their kid. I don't think lack of being allowed to beat kids with sticks is the issue...

As Cedric quoted in the other thread

Prisons are too soft and need to get back to being prisons.

Lack of parental discipline.

Lack of discipline in schools.

I ask all on here, are we that naive to think that these are the only cause`s or solutions to the situation :shrug: We need to look at things on a larger scale and at every aspect of how this country or really the whole world is actualy being managed. No I do not agree with what is happening and like every other caring parent I think what will it all be like for our children and their children. Yes there are those that just want to do it because they can, there are also a lot who are just fired up and ready for an excuse, a lot of that is born out of frustration of the circumstances they are in. And believe it or not a lot of those circumstances are out of their control, all too easy for people to blame each individual. When I was a youngster you read about kids throwing blocks at trains from the bridges and other mindless acts of criminal damage, over the years rioting was not uncommon, let us not kid ourselves here people need to realise that this is all the same sheeite but on a bigger scale. The case of James Bulger, Baby " P " to name just two tragedy`s Do we blame the police for this, the parents or what? It is a very fragile social situation that a lot of people are living under at the moment, we need to wake up to the fact that this whole situation is not going to go away overnight it is a social cancer that has slowly spread, there are far too many underlying causes to all of it. So do we blame their parents? You could do if you want to but then would they blame their parents and the way they were brought up? Do I have an answer to it all? Not really as I think this is something that needs to be addressed over a very long period of time if it gets addressed at all due to the economic situation we are in at the moment, it should have been done years ago imo as we are really just seeing the knock on effect. Looking through the Tottenham burns thread it is interesting to see people lashing out with big words and proper grammar when they disagree with the opinions of others, getting almost personal in some cases, the rioters on the other hand are lashing out with violence and destruction two very different outcomes but then two different worlds apart. I also came across this which is quite interesting http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/mar/29/indices-multiple-deprivation-poverty-england Some might think I am talking crap here, but being a non educated guy it is all I am capable of.

 

[gramps]

Good to see the parents of one girl in Manchester being ordered to appear before the court as they didn't attend with her

 

[Matt]

No. A child has peers, who in teenagers have far more influence over children that there parents. If children rebel there is in some cases little the parent can do. We see it at school. Children who turn bad, parents fully supportive doing everything they can, doesn't make a difference, child still carries on his path.

I am worried that so many are advocating power over people through fear. The issue is that respect is lost, and when they realise they have little to fear then you have lost them full stop. I see 14 year old boys, 6ft 2 and about 15 stone. Now what chance have you got of ruling that child through fear? Hitting them will do no good. Same as the cane never did. Mark of honour. I have seen a headmaster rarely have to raise his voice in 5 years, had complete respect of all students in the school and even the bad kids respected him enough never to lie to him and rarely did they play up with him. I have also seen someone shout and scream at children and try to rule a school through fear of crossing them or daring to be naughty. Guess which one worked better?

there is a difference between fear and respect, it is possible to have complete respect for people, and know that stepping out of line will have repercussions, THAT is what is missing, some of these little gits have no worry of the repercussions of their actions. one OMGI was interviewed on the news today, he said that 'well innit cos like all my homes were like lets Team and then we cant get caught like innit cos there is a whole bunch of us then the man cant pin it on us like'

 

[DazJW]

How's this for the parent being held responsible?