Is this stealing

[constantconvert]

I have warned my daughter several times about keeping better track of her allowance or gift cards. She leaves them lying around, and eventually loses them. I’ve told her to keep them in one specific place, like a wallet, jewelery box or someplace she won’t lose them, and she’s 14 so definitely old enough to be responsible about such things. I feel like if I see allowance or a gift card lying about I should just pocket it to teach her a lesson, but I didn’t know if that would be considered stealing.

 

[Catholic1954]

If you are doing it to get her attention and intend to give them back (after YET ANOTHER talk!) I don’t think it would be stealing. Stealing is taking someone’s property with the intention of not returning it. As the parent, you have the responsibilty to teach your child respect for private property, starting with her own.

 

[bdjohnbg]

In my opinion, if you were to tell her that you are going to take any allowance/gift cards/etc. that you find lying around, then it would not be stealing to do so; it would only be enforcing the rules you have set forth as her parent.

My son has a bad habit of keeping his allowance in his pants pockets (along with things like pens and toys). He now keeps his money in his penny bank, because I told him I would be keeping anything I find in his pockets when I do laundry. After a couple times, he started remembering to check his pockets.

Now as far as you taking them without informing her first, I don’t really know if that would technically be stealing or not, or if it makes a difference that you are the parent and she is the child.

 

[meltzerboy]

If you are doing it to get her attention and intend to give them back (after YET ANOTHER talk!) I don’t think it would be stealing. Stealing is taking someone’s property with the intention of not returning it. As the parent, you have the responsibilty to teach your child respect for private property, starting with her own.

According to Maimonides’ “Mishneh Torah,” even with the intention of returning the property or paying for it, the act is still regarded as stealing. However, I personally do not consider this parental behavior, used to teach the child a valuable lesson, as breaking one of the negative commandments. Maimonides vs. meltzerboy!

 

[lifeisbeautiful]

In my opinion, if you were to tell her that you are going to take any allowance/gift cards/etc. that you find lying around, then it would not be stealing to do so; it would only be enforcing the rules you have set forth as her parent.

My son has a bad habit of keeping his allowance in his pants pockets (along with things like pens and toys). He now keeps his money in his penny bank, because I told him I would be keeping anything I find in his pockets when I do laundry. After a couple times, he started remembering to check his pockets.

Now as far as you taking them without informing her first, I don’t really know if that would technically be stealing or not, or if it makes a difference that you are the parent and she is the child.

This!

I think that if at all possible, consequences/potential punishments should be explained beforehand (that goes with any child any age), allowing them to know what the consequences of their actions can be.

 

[1ke]

Confiscation of a child’s property in the household by a parent is not stealing. Children really don’t have their own property, except perhaps gifts given specifically to them. Everything else is on loan from you, the purchaser of said property.

You support your child totally. Where did that allowance come from? You.

 

[SMHW]

I believe that children have the same right to suffer the consequences of their actions (within reason, of course) as do the adults in the family.

If the general household rule is that personal items will be confiscated if left lying around then gift cards and allowance money fall into that category. If the adults regularly leave all sorts of things lying around and expect them to be there later then it would be normal for children to think the same thing.

The rule in a lot of homes is that items left lying around go into a bin somewhere and they can be claimed within a certain time period if ownership can be demonstrated. Unclaimed items eventually become the property of the finder.

 

[EasterJoy]

Taking someone else’s stuff using the rationalization “they shouldn’t have left it lying around” is stealing, yes. What if your daughter went to college and did this to a roommate?

Picking up things that are your child’s responsibility to keep in their place and telling the child that, as explained beforehand, the things are to be given to someone more deserving or that the child will have to earn the items back is something else again. That is imposing a natural consequence as a learning experience during the phase of life when the cost of the lesson is still low to the pupil.

If you don’t give the gift cards back, you have to tell the child what happened to them and you may not keep them for yourself. You could, however, put them into a family fund for gift-giving to other people, provided that this penalty was something the offender could have fairly predicted before the offense.

I agree with SMHW: If you leave your stuff lying around the same way, you should subject yourself to the same consequences, in order to teach by example and to establish an atomosphere of fairness. Adolescents have a very high sense of whether or not they are being held to a higher standard than people who are older and ought to be expected to behave just as well, especially the parents making the rules.

I think it is a very bad precedent for the “finder” to expect to automatically benefit from their “discovery”, let alone that they give themselves permission to pocket the whole “find” without trying to notify the person(s) they know is likely to be the owner. Rather, it would be better if “finds” go into a community fund that does not unduly reward the finder.

Children should be taught that ethical people make an effort to get lost items back to their rightful owners. That attitude makes for a far kinder world. Be honest and impose just the kind of “finder’s fee” that you would insist on giving to a stranger who made such a kind gesture to you. If you would give nothing, then think about that.

 

[FullOfThought]

I can’t believe we are even debating this.

Yes. This is definitely stealing.

As for the ‘parent child’ and ‘under my roof’ argument’, you could tell your daughter that you will begin confiscating them if you find them laying around. The fact she lives under your roof or is your child does not give you the right to spend her money. This could be a great way to educate her on finances… I don’t think you spending her money will teach her anything.

 

[EasterJoy]

Confiscation of a child’s property in the household by a parent is not stealing. Children really don’t have their own property, except perhaps gifts given specifically to them. Everything else is on loan from you, the purchaser of said property.

You support your child totally. Where did that allowance come from? You.

Taken strictly at face value, I’m forced to say this is an incorrect reading of moral law. Children can own their own property and may rightfully expect to have their property rights respected by everyone. If a child is given an allowance, it is rightfully theirs unless it is clearly a loan made for a specific use and with specific conditions placed on it. A child’s property is also subject to fees, fines and penalties, just as an adult’s property is subject to the same under civil law, but children do rightfully have some expectation of a just system of due process, even from his or her parents.

I’m not saying you’re in the wrong, only with the way you chose to word your position statement. A child’s things should not be subject to confiscation that is utterly at the whim of the parents, which could be implied by the way you stated that. I don’t think for a minute that you meant that, though, did you?

 

[1ke]

I don’t think for a minute that you meant that, though, did you?

Yes, I do mean that.

I do not mean taking the money Aunt Sally gave you for your birthday.

I do mean that iPods, computers, clothing, and more are all subject to restriction based on house rules and children’s behavior. The roof over their heads and everything in it belong to the parents who provide it to them.

If the house rules are that you look after your things, put them away, etc, and they are found to be where they do not belong, then yes the parents have a right to confiscate and restrict use for a period of time.

 

[EasterJoy]

Yes, I do mean that.

I do not mean taking the money Aunt Sally gave you for your birthday.

I do mean that iPods, computers, clothing, and more are all subject to restriction based on house rules and children’s behavior. The roof over their heads and everything in it belong to the parents who provide it to them.

If the house rules are that you look after your things, put them away, etc, and they are found to be where they do not belong, then yes the parents have a right to confiscate and restrict use for a period of time.

Right. This is different than confiscating a child’s iPod that had been left sitting where it doesn’t belong, selling it at a pawn shop, and quietly pocketing the money, which of course a parent could rightly do if the child had only been borrowing an iPod that actually belonged to the parent. In the latter case, the child would have no room to complain, as the parent was only disposing of property that truly belonged to the parent. The OP’s case is not like that.

 

[SMHW]

I do think that whatever the rules are for a particular family, that the consequences should be clearly understood.

Telling a child that he should do something is *not *the equivalent of saying that the parent will impose a consequence if the requested behavior is not put into action.

The parent ought to tell the child that items that are not treated with respect are subject to confiscation or other actions.

 

[Kelfa28]

Yes, I do mean that.

I do not mean taking the money Aunt Sally gave you for your birthday.

I do mean that iPods, computers, clothing, and more are all subject to restriction based on house rules and children’s behavior. The roof over their heads and everything in it belong to the parents who provide it to them.

If the house rules are that you look after your things, put them away, etc, and they are found to be where they do not belong, then yes the parents have a right to confiscate and restrict use for a period of time.

I completely agree.

Anything given to them by their parents can be taken away for punishment purposes. This should include allowance.

I don’t feel that the parent should spend the money on themselves. Just keep it until the child learns the lesson.

I don’t think liberating 5 dollars you gave them for allowance that was irresponsibly left in their pants pocket before laundry is any different from taking an IPod away for punishment purposes.

 

[EasterJoy]

We actually do have “kid’s stuff” at our place that was purchased explicitly to remain the property of the parent. It was more than one child could afford and more than the other was getting, so we made it clear that it belonged to Mom & Dad, that the child had no say over who got to use it and when, and that if the child did not care for it as specified the parents had the right to get rid of it at will. That was very up front, though, and didn’t apply to the child’s other sports gear.

 

[ahollars]

Children have no property rights in my house.

Gifts from other people are still subject to our restrictions, as a condition of allowing said gifts to enter under our roof. All items stored within our home are for community use among all residents. Clothing is passed down to younger siblings, along with other size restricted items like bicycles. Books, toys, and school supplies are all meant to be shared. All electronic items are family property, except for the Playstation 3. That explicitly belongs to Mommy and Daddy. Having said that, all children need permission before handling any item, unless specifically told that they are allowed to use something at will.

Allowances are not salaries, at least in my house they are not. An allowance is just that, an allowance. It is based on what I can afford versus what I believe they can handle. There is no fixed amount or timetable, except for our oldest, who can understand the concepts of failure to perform and overtime.

All items inside the home are subject to the will of the homeowners, with one exception. Teenagers who earn a salary outside the home and pay taxes on said salary have a valid expectation of ownership and privacy, subject to the conditions of being a resident of the home. When my kids begin to work, anything they buy with their money will not be subject to the needs of their siblings.

 

[NSFrame]

If you give a child an allowance and it’s not truly his money, then it’s not really an allowance. The point of an allowance is to teach children to handle money responsibly. If the money does not truly belong to the child, then how is he to really feel ownership and learn the adult responsibility that you are trying to instill? In fact, the whole point is for the child to make mistakes, so he can make them now.

As to the gifts that are left around - I don’t think confiscating is the same as stealing. I am assuming you wouldn’t actually take the confiscated gift cards and go buy yourself a latte or whatever, because that would be stealing. Just taking them and telling your daughter you’ve taken them (after she’s been warned) is not in and of itself stealing.

 

[SMHW]

I

As to the gifts that are left around - I don’t think confiscating is the same as stealing. I am assuming you wouldn’t actually take the confiscated gift cards and go buy yourself a latte or whatever, because that would be stealing. Just taking them and telling your daughter you’ve taken them (after she’s been warned) is not in and of itself stealing.

Kind of like leaving your car parked on a public street a bit too long. Whether it’s 20 minutes, or two weeks, if you leave it there too long it will get towed.