Spying or Responsible Parenting?

[PelagiathePenit]

I understand the parent’s perspective. A lot of millenials do not have the money or resources to move out right after high school or even graduate school. My parents strongly discouraged me from working. If they kicked me out now, where would I go? I wish I had worked though. I think it is odd that parents still want to monitor their adult children. I understand the world is a scary place but gees.

 

[AClaire11]

What has Dr. Guarendi said that people disagree with? I’m trying to figure out the potential issue with him, but all that’s coming up on Google is him saying a father and mother are optimal for adopted children and someone accusing him of not taking seriously a caller’s claim of being abused. I haven’t read anything by him, so I feel like maybe I’m missing something.

 

[Acolyte]

What has Dr. Guarendi said that people disagree with? I’m trying to figure out the potential issue with him, but all that’s coming up on Google is him saying a father and mother are optimal for adopted children and someone accusing him of not taking seriously a caller’s claim of being abused. I haven’t read anything by him, so I feel like maybe I’m missing something.

I invite you to listen to his radio and television programs. Also, he has written a library of books on child rearing.

For the purposes of this thread I can only imagine that the major issue some here have with the psychologist is his approach to technology and children. I can’t imagine how this could be considered as ‘harmful’ or B.S, however.

 

[pensmama87]

What has Dr. Guarendi said that people disagree with? I’m trying to figure out the potential issue with him, but all that’s coming up on Google is him saying a father and mother are optimal for adopted children and someone accusing him of not taking seriously a caller’s claim of being abused. I haven’t read anything by him, so I feel like maybe I’m missing something.

I’ve read several of his books and they all struck me as very common sense and normal. I could see how hard leftists could have a problem with him, but that’s not a problem for me. He’s definitely not the Pearls, for instance, or Gothard (that’s the Duggars’ guy.)

 

[Andrea_Day]

Exactly: everyone knows that lesbianism is caused by bicycles

I am glad that you are taking so much delight in this what is a very serious matter especially for so many concerned parents. I would like to invite you to visit the Courage/Encourage site and perhaps consider joining the group and get in touch with the people who have been affected by their loved ones’ SSA and the resultant effects that has had on the families involved. I guarantee you that not one of these parents would find much humor in this.

It would be folly to dismiss the influence of others currently promoting the ‘lifestyle’ has had on these folks’ children. Whether they be encountered online or in person, the reality is that this influence is real, does and has divided families. To the extent that we can minimize or eradicate this influence either by filtering online content or by remaining emotionally available to our children, we should.

As I understood it, what TheAmazingGrace said was not mocking people who experience SSA, or the loved ones of those who experience SSA, but was mocking the idea that parents turn their adult daughters into lesbians by not sufficiently controlling their adult daughter’s internet access. Correct me if I’m wrong TheAmazingGrace.

 

[Acolyte]

Parents have the legal right to use monitoring software in their home. I think it is extremely wrong for parents to monitor their kids without sharing up front monitoring will happen. It could easily destroy your relationship if your teen realizes you are spying on them in a sphere they understood to be private.

My friend was up front with his entire family concerning his Internet filtering/monitoring policy. Where he says he failed his daughter was in not following up on the monitoring part.

That said, I have strong personal objection to parents using internet monitoring for reasons other than their child’s safety or in order to make sure their teen is obeying the law. Refusing to grant your teen basic privacy and freedom will cause resentment and may well lead to your teen finding ways around your restrictions. If you ban things without providing logical reasons, your teen WILL engage in those behaviors when they move out, and keep an open eye to how they may get around the ban while still at home.

It depends on the teen. Sometimes it is enough to know that the parent objects to absolute privacy in the interest of the child’s safety. If the child loves and respects the parent, often this is enough.

Furthermore, something I wish more parents realized is that when teens engage in forbidden, dangerous or sinful internet behavior it is often to meet a certain need they are not getting met offline. If you are proactive about meeting your teens’ needs offline, they are going to be MUCH more co-operative about you monitoring their internet/phone activity.

In my friend’s case, had he but followed up but once in his monitoring he would have known the full extent of his daughter’s decline and then been able to at least talk with her the nature of her concerns. She hid her depression well under the guise of some other reasons.

Are you providing daily opportunities for your social teens to connect with their peers? Are you being proactive about reassuring your teen you will love and support them no matter what, even if they are gay, transgender, converting to another faith, etc.? Are you helping your teen find healthy outlets for anger and sadness? Are you willing to involve professionals or third parties if conflict with you is the source of anger or sadness for your teen? Does your teen have access to a health care professional they can ask anything to confidentially, without you sitting in the exam room with them? Are you teaching your teen about sexuality and puberty when they start experiencing it? Do you give your teens opportunities to talk openly with you that will not result in punishment, yelling, etc.? Do you provide ways for your teens to ask you questions anonymously or not face to face? If the answer to these questions is no, your teen will likely go to the internet instead of you. If you fail to meet a need and block your teen from other avenues they could use to meet the need (including internet access), there will likely be damage to your relationship as well as to your child. Your teen will start attempting to meet the need you’ve denied them when they move out and tyranny while they were a minor will cause you to lose the privilege of being a part of your adult child’s exploration of said area.

Yes, to all of the above according to my friend. She obviously had no issues finding an outlet online and did so semi-anonymously. In fact, her online friends took advantage of her depression and gave reasons for her to distrust her parents even turning her against them in the end.

Internet addiction is another reason teens engage in forbidden, dangerous or sinful internet behavior, though addictions are often formed because teens are trying to meet a need unmet in their offline life.

I am speaking here from personal experience and the experiences of my friends.

This indeed may have been another factor in this family tragedy.

 

[Andrea_Day]

I disagree with you on this point. The ‘Born that Way’ myth is just that. A myth.

lifesitenews.com/news/psychology-researcher-lesbian-blows-the-doors-off-born-gay-theory

The reality is that there are people who experience SSA, who have experienced SSA for as long as they can remember, and are unable to change the fact that they have SSA. The theory about these people is that they must then have been born that way. It is a theory, which has not been debunked, nor sufficiently supported by evidence.

There are also people like me, who’s sexual orientation has spontaneously changed over the course of their lives. The fact that some people experience spontaneous orientation shifts (which is what the APA is acknowledging) does NOT mean it is healthy or possible for every person to shift their orientation deliberately through prayer or therapy. Not every person experience spontaneous orientation fluidity either.

If an adult chooses to seek reparative therapy, that is their choice. If a minor is forced into reparative therapy it is abuse. If an adult is forced into reparative therapy, it is abuse. There are certain repartivie therapy methods which are inherently harmful, even if they are successful, which should be made illegal. The stories of people like Alex Cooper, who survived abusive repartive therapy that they were forced into by their parents, are devastating and should never happen to anyone. youtube.com/watch?v=qDuD8wNhc2A

What is true for all people with SSA is that they did not choose to have SSA. Most people find attempts at changing orientation to be unsuccessful and harmful. Some heterosexual people chose to engage in homosexual sex for various reasons, but same sex attraction is something people do not choose.

Ultimately, our concern should rest far more in loving people–regardless of their orientation–than it should in learning the origin of certain orientations.

 

[Andrea_Day]

What is also true is that up until 1973, the APA considered homosexuality a mental illness. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) was changed on this point not with any scientific evidence or proof but purely on politics and sentimentality. See further, Chapter 7 of Making Gay Okay: How Rationalizing Homosexual Behavior Is Changing Everything by Robert R. Reilly

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4695779/

 

[Acolyte]

You give me the impression that you have a lot of disgust or hatred for those in the LGBT movement by the way you are talking about them. I am not heterosexual myself and this makes me very sad. I shall say a prayer for you.

By all means, please pray for me. After all, “Love is love is love is love is love…”, right? And I will pray for you.

The situation with your friend and his adult daughter sounds very painful, and I am sorry to hear they are going through that. But it seems clear to me there is more to the story than what you have shared. You have not told the daughter’s perspective. The fact that an adult daughter is being required to ask permission from her father to have an online journal is concerning.

There are multiple computer-using children in the man’s home. The filtering was set the same for all and done by categories. Exceptions to the filter set were manually done and the site in question was blocked by a certain category. There was nothing concerning about this set up.

 

[Acolyte]

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4695779/

Still not seeing the scientific reasoning or evidence for the change… I see much about activism, stigmatism and protests, however.

 

[styrgwillidar]

Whether we should spy on teens in the bathroom, bedroom or online is answered by the same larger question: what is the balance between a child’s privacy rights, ownership rights and the parent’s right to look out for their child’s welfare?

I would add…and the parents legal liabilities for the acts of the child. You as the parent, owner of the network can be held legally liable for various things your child does. You may end up paying the penalties they’re assessed. (illegal downloads of movies and music, illegal sharing of passwords to various sites with friends, copyright violations, selling or trading various things via the web, exchange/access of information available in some portions of the darknet, identity theft, child pornography should one of their friends start sending them illicit material they generate themselves etc.) Also if your child gets involved in theft, drug use or sale, vandalism, and utilizes the web/phone for exchanging information with folks engaging in the activity with them.

When I got my driver’s license my Dad pointed out that if I screwed up in the car and hurt someone or did enough damage-- he could lose his house. It was the only asset he had. If he couldn’t trust me to keep that in mind when driving-- I wasn’t going to be driving.

I agree with those who say you explain to your kid why you’re going to monitor, what the natural consequences as well as legal consequences of misbehavior or misuse can be, not just to themselves but others as well. If you can’t trust them, they don’t get access.

Now, even if you trust your child, and even if they’re not doing anything elicit, you do need to be monitoring their web pages for two reasons. It does give you some insight via their images and posts what they’re up to and mindset, as well as their friends. It may prompt a conversation about why a specific image spoke to them. You may catch something suspicious with your advanced years and additional experience that they miss.

As for bathroom privacy. I don’t believe it gets violated unless you have compelling evidence that something harmful to their safety is going on- drug/alcohol use; cutting themselves etc.

Your kids will always find a way to sneak something past you. Access internet at a friends house or school etc. I think you have to build trust from when they are little and explain that the more they demonstrate their compliance with the rules, their willingness to abide by them, the more you can and will trust them in the future. You need to show me now that I can trust you when you’re somewhere else because you’re going to want to drive places when you’re in high school, go places with your friends. Show me I can trust you now, and I’ll know I can trust you then. Break my trust now, and I’ll have a hard time trusting you in the future. Always harder to rebuild trust after it has been violated. Which goes two ways. You break their trust on something key, incredibly difficult to rebuild.

 

[Andrea_Day]

So, you too think the recommendations of Catholic clinical psychologist Dr. Ray Guarendi is B.S.? Why am I not surprised?

From what I know, the Catholic counselor they are having sessions with has no issues with Dr. Ray.

To insist that the LGBT movement is not devastating to families or doesn’t seek to undermine parents in order to normalize the behavior is naïve at best. Again, I would ask that you visit with Encourage, parents of SSA children, and you will come face to face with people who have been deeply hurt but who also have great hope.

What I am calling B.S. is the quote you provided from Dr. Ray, which your friend seems to have been parenting by, “The legal age is meaningless. What matters is the child’s social and moral age.” The key word here being “meaningless”.

The LGBT movement is not devastating families. To the contrary, many families exist today because of the LGBT movement. The LGBT movement’s purpose is to provide a voice, rights, respect and safety to all sexual minorities, to legalize consensual homosexual sex and to legalize gay marriage. I am on board with everything except legalizing gay civil marriage–I believe in privatizing marriage.

I have SSA. It sounds as though you are trying to tell me I don’t realize what dealing with SSA is like. I am very familiar with Courage, and **the stories of Courage members are valid. **They are also in the minority. Courage members talk about how SSA has been a burden for them, how they hate having SSA, how their SSA came from sexual abuse and family wounds. This is not the experience of most people with SSA. Most people with SSA struggle with how others react to their attractions, rather than with having the attractions themselves. I don’t hate having SSA and I never did. I am proud of who I am, who God has made me to be, and the community of amazing people having SSA has led me to meet. I believe God will use my SSA for good.

I have not heard many testimonies from Encourage members, but I have heard from plenty of parents who are proud of their gay and lesbian children, who love their children regardless of their sexual orientation and I deeply respect them for that.

 

[Andrea_Day]

I would add…and the parents legal liabilities for the acts of the child. You as the parent, owner of the network can be held legally liable for various things your child does. You may end up paying the penalties they’re assessed. (illegal downloads of movies and music, illegal sharing of passwords to various sites with friends, copyright violations, selling or trading various things via the web, exchange/access of information available in some portions of the darknet, identity theft, child pornography should one of their friends start sending them illicit material they generate themselves etc.) Also if your child gets involved in theft, drug use or sale, vandalism, and utilizes the web/phone for exchanging information with folks engaging in the activity with them.

When I got my driver’s license my Dad pointed out that if I screwed up in the car and hurt someone or did enough damage-- he could lose his house. It was the only asset he had. If he couldn’t trust me to keep that in mind when driving-- I wasn’t going to be driving.

I agree with those who say you explain to your kid why you’re going to monitor, what the natural consequences as well as legal consequences of misbehavior or misuse can be, not just to themselves but others as well. If you can’t trust them, they don’t get access.

Now, even if you trust your child, and even if they’re not doing anything elicit, you do need to be monitoring their web pages for two reasons. It does give you some insight via their images and posts what they’re up to and mindset, as well as their friends. It may prompt a conversation about why a specific image spoke to them. You may catch something suspicious with your advanced years and additional experience that they miss.

As for bathroom privacy. I don’t believe it gets violated unless you have compelling evidence that something harmful to their safety is going on- drug/alcohol use; cutting themselves etc.

Your kids will always find a way to sneak something past you. Access internet at a friends house or school etc. I think you have to build trust from when they are little and explain that the more they demonstrate their compliance with the rules, their willingness to abide by them, the more you can and will trust them in the future. You need to show me now that I can trust you when you’re somewhere else because you’re going to want to drive places when you’re in high school, go places with your friends. Show me I can trust you now, and I’ll know I can trust you then. Break my trust now, and I’ll have a hard time trusting you in the future. Always harder to rebuild trust after it has been violated. Which goes two ways. You break their trust on something key, incredibly difficult to rebuild.

Agreed.

I don’t believe parents should be held legally responsible for the actions of their teens. Teens are old enough to take responsibility for their own actions.

 

[Xantippe]

Agreed.

I don’t believe parents should be held legally responsible for the actions of their teens. Teens are old enough to take responsibility for their own actions.

14-year-olds?

 

[Andrea_Day]

What has Dr. Guarendi said that people disagree with? I’m trying to figure out the potential issue with him, but all that’s coming up on Google is him saying a father and mother are optimal for adopted children and someone accusing him of not taking seriously a caller’s claim of being abused. I haven’t read anything by him, so I feel like maybe I’m missing something.

He teaches spanking is an acceptable punishment and Acolyte attributed this quote to him, which I consider to be utter nonsense: “The legal age is meaningless. What matters is the child’s social and moral age.” The key word here being “meaningless”.

I read his book years ago, and I remember objecting to a number of things, but I don’t recall the specifics at the moment.

 

[pensmama87]

14-year-olds?

Yeah.

I made a lot of stupid decisions as a teen, some that could have been very dangerous. My parents did not monitor me because they thought I was too smart and mature. And compared to other kids, maybe I was. But I was still a teen, and my decision making skills and danger sensors were not as good as they are now.

I think my parents made a mistake here. I’m not keen on repeating it.

 

[Andrea_Day]

By all means, please pray for me. After all, “Love is love is love is love is love…”, right? And I will pray for you.

There are multiple computer-using children in the man’s home. The filtering was set the same for all and done by categories. Exceptions to the filter set were manually done and the site in question was blocked by a certain category. There was nothing concerning about this set up.

I never said “love is love”. Thank you for your prayers.

As I have said, my concern is with parents monitoring their adult children. I have no objection to parents being up front about and then monitoring their minor children. I think that is responsible parenting.

 

[mommy_k]

I never said “love is love”. Thank you for your prayers.

As I have said, my concern is with parents monitoring their adult children. I have no objection to parents being up front about and then monitoring their minor children. I think that is responsible parenting.

Ok…everyone has the right to thier wrong opinions. even you…

 

[UbiCaritas]

Ok…everyone has the right to thier wrong opinions. even you…

Hmmm. A thought:

If parents are still responsible for the activities of their adult children, when does that end?

Should parents be required to also spend the night in their married kids’ bedroom to make sure that all–ahem–activity that goes on there is of the sort that’s acceptable in the eyes of the Catholic Church?

Because that’s the logical conclusion to the idea that parents must still monitor their adult children.

One could also argue, as do some rather extreme fundamentalists, that children of any age should never be allowed to toilet, shower, or sleep alone or unwatched because doing so is a near occasion of sin. Me? I say that at some point, you have to let kids grow up, albeit with reasonable precautions. Sure, knock on the door if they’re taking unreasonably long in the bathroom, but also don’t insist that even through their teen years, they can only relieve or bathe themselves in the presence of 1-2 others because being alone is a near occasion of sin.

It’s far better to allow kids to grow up gradually, acquiring responsibility and trust as they demonstrably earn them, than to deny them the ability to mature at all.

(Come to think of it, reading the Bible, riding a bicycle, playing sports, looking at works of great art, and eating whole wheat bread all have the potential to be a near occasion of sin for someone, and yet we–again, within reason–would probably agree that kids should be allowed to do any of those things.)

I agree 100% with monitoring of internet connections in one’s home in general, both to protect people from the nastier side of the web and to protect yourself from some really nasty potentialities. (Hint: never, EVER have an internet connection at home with a nonexistent or simple password.)

 

[EasterJoy]

Agreed.

I don’t believe parents should be held legally responsible for the actions of their teens. Teens are old enough to take responsibility for their own actions.

Unfortunately, the law does not always read it that way. Parents are usually held responsible to make a reasonable amount of effort to know if their child poses a threat to others or is engaging in criminal behavior.

More to the point, however, the law isn’t going to console us when our child is harmed because we were asleep at the wheel. If we give our children so much privacy that we give them “enough rope to hang themselves with,” as the saying goes, we’re going to hold ourselves responsible when our failures gives our child enough room to make a very bad and harmful decision that is foreseeable for someone in their age group.

“Well, yes, other people’s children do things like that, but we never dreamed our teen would ever do anything like that” doesn’t cut it. Teach your children to think themselves as just as prone to bad-decision-making as anyone else, given the opportunity. They’re human beings.