tommyflattop's comments

Should You Discipline Other People's Children? - Blog Entry

18 May 2007 06:08 PM

This is going to sound as cynical as it gets.

We are getting what we asked for when we ceased to be a community and left our front porches to go inside, close our doors and become isolationists.

American society has become so prone to resort to litigation, so indulgent, ultra-protective and trusting of their children, and so distrusting of other people that one is really taking a risk to even speak to another's child in passing, much less to correct them under any circumstances. This has become true even of people in public trust positions such as teachers and coaches; and yes, I realize that some people in public trust positions have violated that trust in the past. That makes it no less ridiculous and no less a tragedy that the general public has now withdrawn that trust.

Many people will resort to calling the police for harmless pranks in which children may engage during Halloween, graduation night, or at any other time. They don't feel comfortable correcting their neighbor's child or even confronting their neighbor about their children's misbehavior.

Even most people in public trust positions are reluctant to really correct children because of fears of litigation by some parent who feels their authority has been somehow threatened or challenged, or that their most trustworthy child's integrity has been questioned.

Teachers are subjected to background investigations to certify their trustworthiness. How many kids have gone through that kind of scrutiny? Still, many parents will insist that their kid wouldn't lie. Teachers are also put into positions of responsibility for, and authority over children. However, that authority is no longer equal to the level of responsiblity they have. Most teachers must refer children to the school administration for any real punishment (even then, I seriously question how much is happening to a child that most of us would agree is enough punishment to curb inappropriate behavior, even with the full written consent of parents.) At any rate, those referrals are time consuming and cumbersome, so many teachers let most things for which kids should be punished go unpunished. Remember, punishment is designed to improve behavior. Allowing a child to go unpunished for inappropriate conduct only reinforces to the child that he or she is not answerable for his or her conduct. Increased incidences of inappropriate conduct inevitably ensue under those conditions. That leads to a need for an increased security presence in the school. Why do you think so many schools have security guards or school resource officers assigned by local law enforcement departments? They're not there to protect the student body or faculty from outside threats. They're there to enforce school rules of conduct because too many children have been conditioned to believe they are not answerable to the authority of appointed school officials, but only to their parents and/or law enforcement.

Obviously, not all parents are prone to such irrational behavior, but many are, and enough courts acquiese to these irrational parents and their unreasonable demands to make attempts at correcting anyone else's children a very risky proposition. One dare not, even as a person in a public trust position, and certainly not as a private citizen, risk the wrath of the offended parent by disciplining their child.

There have always been parents like that too, but only in recent years have our institutions (such as police departments, social services, courts, school boards, and sports leagues) given them so much creedence and allowed them to make miserable the lives of anyone who interacts with their children in any way they personally don't like by dragging them in front of some adjuticative body to account for their actions. You never know how reasonable or unreasonable one of those adjuticative bodies may be, so why risk it?

There will come a day (is it here already?) when the adult community will say: "Cross me you ten-year-old kid and I'll call the law on you. Why? Because I know if I cross you there is a better than average chance that your parents will call the law on me."

When I started this diatribe, I said it would sound as cynical as it gets, but can anyone rationally disagree with me? In this day and age, you are taking a great risk if you discipline someone else's kid. Chances are you will not get thanked by a parent grateful to you for taking enough interest in the welfare of their child to take time to correct them, even if they are in your charge. It will just as likely get you prosecuted in criminal court and/or sued in civil court. And, unfortunately, it is just as likely that you will lose in court as it is that you will win. Either way, why risk it and wind up in court defending your actions? If parents want unilateral authority over their children exclusive of law enforcement that's fine with me. However, they will also have to accept unilateral responsibility for their children. Don't ask me to help you look out for your children. I'll not take responsibility without commensurate authority. "Cross me you ten-year-old kid and I'll call the law on you."

Tommy