Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Parents turn to tech toys to track teens
San Francisco Chronicle ^ | July 9, 2006 | Janine DeFao

Posted on 07/10/2006 1:47:07 PM PDT by Ben Mugged

Paige White was surprised when her parents figured out soon after she started driving last year that she'd gone 9 miles to a party, not 4 miles to the friend's house she'd told them she was visiting. It seemed to her almost as if her car was bugged.

It was.

Paige's parents had installed a device in their daughter's SUV that can tell them not only how far she's driven, but how fast and whether she's made any sudden stops or hard turns.

"I was kind of mad because I felt it was an invasion of my privacy," said the Los Gatos resident, now 17.

Parents, some of whom feel outmatched by their offspring in this tech-savvy world, are using a growing number of gadgets, software and specially equipped cell phones to track kids' driving, read their instant messages and pinpoint where they're hanging out.

~snip~But cyber-snooping is simply a new tool, experts say. It doesn't resolve the dilemma parents have grappled with for generations: How much free rein do you give children so they can learn the lessons they need to grow up and be independent?

~snip~

Proponents of the new technology say it can help protect kids -- whether from predators lurking online or their own bad driving. But while there may be gains, monitoring also can take a toll.

"The bottom line is, surveillance will cut down somewhat on potential risk behavior kids will engage in, but it is at a cost," Wolf said. "To the extent that you do surveillance, you are potentially interfering with your kids developing responsibility for their own lives."

(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: childrearing; gpstracking; spy; tagging
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 181-197 next last
To: Secret Agent Man
Again, you confuse a legitimate use of surveillance on a minor child by his parents (legally responsible for that child, and also the owner of the vehicle) to one where the state uses to abuse and oppress the vast majority of society. They aren't the same. You need to understand the difference

They are exactly the same. Raise a child under constant surveillance, and that child will grow into an adult that expects, even demands the same from government. It's what we are beginning to experience today.
101 posted on 07/10/2006 3:32:40 PM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961

Yeah, you know how the conversation went with this girl and her parents on more than one occasion?

Parents: Where are you going tonite sally?

Kid: I'm going over to X's house. <===== LIE!!!!

Parents: Okay, be home by xxxx.

Later parents discover via the car chip sally was lying, not at X's house.

Next time.

Parents: Where are you going tonite sally?

Kid: I'm going over to X's house. <===== LIE!!!!

Parents: Okay, be home by xxxx.

Later parents discover via the car chip sally was lying again, not at X's house.

Wow, you can really talk to your kid, and the kid can still lie to the parents. Amazing.


102 posted on 07/10/2006 3:33:47 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: mysterio

Your premise is complete bullsh1t. Where is the great clamor for it now? Cameras are all over schools and campuses. Some schools have card access for students and visitors. I don't see a ton of kids demanding that they be under surveillance all the time.

I grew up in a strict household with a cop for a stepdad and as an only child without pets. I didn't get away with anything (I had nobody else to blame, not even 'the dog'!)

And I am here to tell you I am opposed to a government run surveillance society. I am not in favor of it and I certainly am not demanding it. I don't even like my grocery stores using buyer cards to track individual purchases.

Weakest argument I have seen yet posted on this.


103 posted on 07/10/2006 3:40:54 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: MMcC
If my parents had put that much effort into spying on me I would have left the day I turned 18 and they would never have heard from me again. Sure parents have the 'right' do do these things, but they are nuts if they try to monitor everything from driving habits, to email, to phone conversations. Let your kid grow up on their own

My daughter tried to pull that crap on me just shortly before her birthday. I wrote guidelines for living in the house. It was clearly communicated that if she could not/would not live by those guidelines, then she needed to live somewhere else. I clearly stated that I was not throwing her out, but strongly encouraging her to live in a place that permitted to live in that fashion.

She pitched a stink at first, but she is still here.

104 posted on 07/10/2006 3:46:11 PM PDT by Bear_Slayer (When liberty is outlawed only outlaws will have liberty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: GrandEagle
Teenagers generally have absolutely no idea of their own mortality or the consequences of their actions on others.

Ain't that the truth? We remember, huh?

As I told my 13 year old (who is the best kid ever): I am here in your business - get used to it. We were talking about why she would not go on MySpace. I likened my active presence in her private life to her as a baby learning to walk by parents holding their both their hands, then it would be one hand, then it would be with the parent's hands hovering over the baby until it could freely walk on it's own. She "got it".

105 posted on 07/10/2006 3:48:57 PM PDT by daybreakcoming ("We will not tire. We will not falter. We will not fail")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Cobra64
And I do not trust you to tell the truth.

But she DID lie to them and gave them further reason not to trust her. Their lack of trust was fully justified, and it'd be my guess that past history started it, otherwise they wouldn't have felt the need to moniter her. Trust needs to be earned; it is not an inalienable right. Sometimes, too, the lack of trust is just because parents have better memories than kids give them credit for.

106 posted on 07/10/2006 3:50:54 PM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Cobra64
Well, you could try asking them where they were. A novel approach around here.

And that proves what? Ever hear of lying, like what that girl did to her parents?

107 posted on 07/10/2006 3:52:59 PM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: metmom
Well, you could try asking them where they were. A novel approach around here.

And that proves what? Ever hear of lying, like what that girl did to her parents?

I get it. You let a machine track your children instead of exercising your parental responsibility of teaching your children to tell the truth? What's your solution to children cheating on their exams? Swearing an oath on the Bible to tell the truth. Forget that. It didn't work with Clinton did it?

I guess we all have different ways in raiding our children.

Cheers.

108 posted on 07/10/2006 4:03:45 PM PDT by Cobra64 (All we get are lame ideas from Republicans and lame criticism from dems about those lame ideas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: metmom

Lying has its consequences. At least it did before Clinton lied before a grand jury. Seems he set a precedent. Eh?


109 posted on 07/10/2006 4:05:26 PM PDT by Cobra64 (All we get are lame ideas from Republicans and lame criticism from dems about those lame ideas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Cobra64

What a foolish person you are, thinking that every child will respond exactly the same way to a parent's disciplinary action.

Some kids will tell the truth when asked. Some will tell the truth if pressed a bit. Some will tell the truth when they feel they can't pull off a lie. Some will tell the truth when it is overwhelmingly apparent they can't pull off a lie. Some will not tell the truth until they are caught after the fact. And then, some do not even do that, and proceed into a whole other new lie to try to explain the first lie.

And that is the case of this girl here. In fact, the article doesn't even state that she did tell her folks she was lying to them, it is just known that she did and they knew she was lying.

Why would it have been so much better for the girl and her parents if she just continued to lie to her parents? What is the great lesson she is learning, other than that if you can get away with lying to legitimate authority figures, it's okay?


110 posted on 07/10/2006 4:14:13 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Ben Mugged

For minors living under their parents' care, privacy is a privilege, not a right. It must be earned, and can be lost if abused. As a general rule, I think it's a good idea to let kids make mistakes and learn from them, but parents have to have a way of knowing if kids stray too far.

I'm not a parent, let alone of a teenager, but I think I'd try to trust my kids as much as a could. But lie to me, and all bets are off. I'd definitely consider GPS on the car, and an e-mail and IM filter to flag anything suspicious. For younger kids, I'd use a whitelist.

My mom never set a strict curfew -- I'd tell her when I'd be home, and I'd better make that time or call before then. Within reason, of course; I couldn't just say "4 am" and get away with it. That arrangement worked because I knew I had it pretty good compared to some of my friends, so I knew better than to abuse it.


111 posted on 07/10/2006 4:15:26 PM PDT by ReignOfError
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SteveMcKing

This has nothing to do with nannying anyone. The kid obviously doesn't have a problem with being a liar so she has shown that she cannot be trusted. Perhaps what Mom (& Dad if he's around) screwed up on was buying the kid an SUV since there are probably other signs that this kid doesn't do what she says that she is going to do. Maybe some accountability lessons would help but in the end, as long as that kid lives under her parents' roof, they are responsible for her.


112 posted on 07/10/2006 4:16:07 PM PDT by misterrob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Cobra64

Ah, but that approach was applied and failed....

Trust is earned and should be advanced through honesty. Since the kid showed that they are not honest they should be out on parole.


113 posted on 07/10/2006 4:19:07 PM PDT by misterrob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: SmoothTalker
I say that in the long run these parents are doing their kids a disservice. Placing bugs in a kids car won't teach them to act responsably when they become an adult

It's not either-or. A responsible balance of privacy and monitoring teaches the right lessons -- you're free to do as you wish, and you are responsible for your actions. Get caught breaking the rules, and there will be consequences.

Not only that, but once you're caught once, it will be a long time (if ever) before you're trusted again.

That's not a bad lesson for living in the real world.

114 posted on 07/10/2006 4:22:51 PM PDT by ReignOfError
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: HarmlessLovableFuzzball
I really am surprised the insurance companies have not offered a discount, IF A CLIENT GETS ONE OF THESE INSTALLED!

Seems like a winner to me....

115 posted on 07/10/2006 4:39:15 PM PDT by pointsal (Q)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man
You have to learn to discern the difference between legitimate uses of surveillance and illegitimate ones.

Legitimate use of surveillance? On your children? How about on your siblings and spouse?

116 posted on 07/10/2006 4:42:26 PM PDT by Cobra64 (All we get are lame ideas from Republicans and lame criticism from dems about those lame ideas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man
I don't see a ton of kids demanding that they be under surveillance all the time.

You will see a society of grown ups in a couple years that make our nanny statism look like relative individualism because they have been nannied and spied on into adulthood.
117 posted on 07/10/2006 4:42:35 PM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man
Would you feel they were more active parents if they actually got in their cars and followed her and busted her on the spot?

Why would I want to bust my children? I'm not a cop. I'm a parent.

118 posted on 07/10/2006 4:44:02 PM PDT by Cobra64 (All we get are lame ideas from Republicans and lame criticism from dems about those lame ideas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: ArrogantBustard
Who paid for the car? Who's paying for the gas? Who's paying for the insurance?

Whatever happened to just plain-old parenting?

Why do some parents need to resort to gimmicks and letting devices do the jobs they're supposed to be doing?

119 posted on 07/10/2006 4:46:14 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist (What you know about that?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Cobra64

Have you any comments about the fact that this kid lied to her mother?


120 posted on 07/10/2006 4:46:43 PM PDT by misterrob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 181-197 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson