Teens Sedate Parents For Net Access

[Cameron Everett]

Man, the worst I ever did when I was 16 was stay out at an all night coffee shop playing D&D...granted This was pre-interwebs so who knows what I'd have done if deprived of my drug of choice.

Which brings up an interesting thought, what they did almost smacks of drug seeking behaviour, in the sense of going to extremes to get your drug of choice. (and let's face it Internet addiction although debated by medical professionals is starting to be considered a real thing.) Or alternatively excess internet usage can be a sign of some other disorder etc.

So yeah, there may well have been a very valid reason for the parents to forbid internet use after a set time, and as the ones footing the bill for the connection, they can damn well do as they please.

 

[dtgenshiken7]

Wow. other teenagers these days are starting to have ABSOLUTELY no respect for their parents. Indeed, 10 is a crap time, but really? Drug them? It doesn't matter how harmless it was, what happens if you accidentally give your parents an overdose and kill them?

"Sorry judge, but my parents wouldn't let me stay on the internet past 10!"

yeah, I can see that going down well. When I wanted a curfew lifted, or anything for that matter, I just nagged. These kids most certainly deserve to have their internet taken for a bloody month or something, have the modem moved to another house.

Honestly, this was probably minor overall, but the overarching consequences, and what COULD have been, are simply too large to ignore. Who's to say this doesn't go around as a clever idea to sneak out of the house, or other things?

 

[ninjaRiv]

Oddly enough, before the internet, this would have been viewed as what it is: silly.

 

[chiefohara]

I've no sympathy for the teens.

Drugging a person is a very big no no, and if it takes a scare from the cops to kick this concept of basic morality into these kids heads, all the better.

Better to learn it now from your folks calling the cops who still have your best interests at heart, than to learn it the hard way as an adult and serve a jail sentence for it

 

[Madgamer13]

Greets!

I see quite a few people in this thread laughing and saying the parents are shitty. Hold on a minute while I facepalm.

*slap*

Kids will generally try to find a way around restrictions to get what they want and there is nothing wrong with that, but a problem does come when they are using medication to achieve this. Indeed, this particular event could be considered the equal of drugging someone you like at the bar so that you can 'take them home'

I would love to see the comments here if the parents died as a result of a bad mix of sedatives or sleeping pills put into that magic milk shake. Believe me, it can be easier to kill someone with sleeping tablets than you might think! Especially if they are on another type of medication already.

 

[mysecondlife]

Reminds me of my ex-gf whose mother set the internet to turn off at 2AM. Makes me wonder what she did to get around it.

Incoming scary thought.

 

[Keoul]

Well in this case it requires my kid to want to drug people and the only reason i'd see my child do it would be for shits and giggles.
Tantrum maybe not, getting violent and what not maybe, if there's a threat of death then sure call the police but they shouldn't of let it get this far in the first place.

Yeah but if we use the example above they would've drugged you to skip curfew, maybe it's just to use the internet now but they might decide to drug you later to go to a party next time is all I'm saying.
I can agree with this part though.

 

[Lunar Templar]

At first I was 'o.0 why did they call the cops'

then, I saw what state it happened, this explains much about why the parents where so gutless as to not sack up and handle the situation them selves.

from what I'm understanding of the story the blames lay with the parents s well as the teens. First of all, 10 PM cut off, at 15 is to restrictive, so it wouldn't surprise me to learn of other violations of this ill suited rule. kids grow up, and treat a 15 year old like a 12 year old is going to cause problems in short order. but, California parents *rolls eyes* I kind expect this kind of half assed attitude from that state.

The teens however, should not have gone so far as to drug some one just to get back online, and should face jail time so they learn that drugging some one is not the appropriate reaction to anything. Sneaking out and darting over to a friends house would have been a much better plan.

 

[chadachada123]

Honestly, had I done this to my dad (with non-prescription sleep aids) as a teen, he would probably laugh about it more than be serious about it. Doesn't practically every house have a bottle of sleep aids around for just in case? Yeah, I'd get in a bit of trouble, but it'd be something we'd laugh about in the future. I understand the article says it was prescription-strength, but other than an overdose risk, the mere act alone seems like something out of a sitcom more than a drama, with very little risk of negative consequences (other than a very tired night). By "very little risk," yes, there's a chance for allergies or bad mixing, but, again, the chances of that are pretty slim.

Call me old-fashioned, but it really doesn't seem like that big of a deal to me, and DEFINITELY not something worth police involvement over.

The girls should be informed of the risk of accepting prescription drugs from other people, absolutely, but I don't think that what they DID with said drugs is anywhere near as dangerous as the acceptance of them in the first place.

I'm with the girls, assuming they did it thinking it was a harmless stunt, since it WAS a harmless, if uneducated, stunt. Next time, I'd suggest using over-the-counter sleep aids instead.

 

[AngloDoom]

I must be old or something, 10PM internet cut-off time = Nazi parents?

This will probably be from the same people who say that parents should monitor what their kids do while on the internet. The parents probably have jobs to go to and can't afford to stay up making sure their offspring isn't posing to strangers on webcam until the early hours of tomorrow.

While I agree that there was no need to get the police involved, I think that - if I was one of the parents - I'd find it hard to think of a suitable punishment for drugging me and my wife. The actions of the children were not justified because of the rules of the parents, no matter how 'strict' you think they are.

Christ, parents really can't win can they?

 

[lunavixen]

snip

treating them like a small child? i would've loved to have a 10pm curfew at their age, mine was between 8:30 and 9:30pm, the parents likely just wanted the kids to get enough sleep.

snip

you have heard of the term 'doli incapax' haven't you? it means conclusive presumption.

"The presumption under common law is that a child under 10 cannot be held legally responsible for their actions. The presumption that a child cannot form Mens Rea or the thought or intention to commit a criminal act as they do not yet have a sufficient understanding between "right and wrong". In the context of Australian law, doli incapx acts as a rebuttable presumption for children aged at least 10 but less than 14."

So basically, once you get to about 15 or 16, there is a presumption that you know the difference between seriously wrong (which is what this issue is) and naughty/mischievous. Besides, these kids would still be treated as a youth and not tried as an adult (they'd be put through the childrens court/family court) as their offence is not severe enough to warrant being tried as an adult.

While yes, the legal system is flawed, a child would neither have the understanding or the money to go to court with a lawyer and file a lawsuit. Besides how many 15 or 16 year olds will understand the law enough without prior learning in the subject?
There was a very real possibility that these girls could have overdosed the parents with those sleeping pills. These girls are very unlikely to be convicted and face jail, if they do get charged, they will most likely get some form of community service and have their record expunged after.

snip

I agree, though i will say, and it concurs with your statement, a conviction will not solve this issue, it's been shown that people who are convicted of crimes are more likely to become recidivist within the system (they'll commit more crime in the future).

snip

'minor' does not always mean stupid, it can mean lack of understanding too. What you've said about "Their brains are physically incapable of comprehending the severity of their actions because they're not fully developed yet" is only a partial truth, by the age of 15 or 16 kids will know the difference between seriously wrong and naughty/mischievous, but likely not have the understanding of the full repercussions of their actions. You are completely right about a criminal conviction not helping, if they do face charges, they'd likely go through the childrens court, if they are sentenced it would likely be community service and having the charges expunged from their record afterwards, as while what they did was seriously wrong, it is not enough to warrant prison time.

You wouldn't care if your child murdered someone or was a contract killer? That is a serious issue within itself, so you wouldn't care if your child was a serious threat to other people? Would you care if your child was a serious threat to your friends or their children? Where do you draw the line?

 

[marurder]

This kind of behavior is despicable. I hope the parents throw the proverbial parenting book at them. Such a betrayal of trust.

 

[EHKOS]

They should face jail time regardless. Drugging someone standing between you and something you want because you can't just wait until the morning is not the mark of a well adjusted individual.

I guess now the girls made their point of how MATURE they are and how SAFE it is to let them roam around the internet.

Look at it the other way: Their parents treated them like small children, and it made them act like small children, what a surprise...

You think that an acceptable response to a curfew (And 10PM is very generous) is to drug the authority figure so you have free reign?

I'm going to play devils advocate and say yes. If someone is in your way, it's not the worst thing in the world to non-violently subdue them. At least it isn't another "Teen kills mother for taking away his keyboard" story. People get pissed when they can't have their way. And don't call it immature, the republicans of the US are doing the same damn thing.

 

[EHKOS]

Reminds me of my ex-gf whose mother set the internet to turn off at 2AM. Makes me wonder what she did to get around it.

Incoming scary thought.

Boot into the BIOS and change the system clock? That's what I did

 

[Madgamer13]

They should face jail time regardless. Drugging someone standing between you and something you want because you can't just wait until the morning is not the mark of a well adjusted individual.

I guess now the girls made their point of how MATURE they are and how SAFE it is to let them roam around the internet.

Look at it the other way: Their parents treated them like small children, and it made them act like small children, what a surprise...

You think that an acceptable response to a curfew (And 10PM is very generous) is to drug the authority figure so you have free reign?

I'm going to play devils advocate and say yes. If someone is in your way, it's not the worst thing in the world to non-violently subdue them. At least it isn't another "Teen kills mother for taking away his keyboard" story. People get pissed when they can't have their way. And don't call it immature, the republicans of the US are doing the same damn thing.

Greets!

Nice.

I am curious how you feel about drugging kids to make sure they stay within curfew hours.

Surely, making sure they are sleeping by a certain time by using medication is reasonable right? I mean if the kids are allowed drug their parents non-violently to circumvent these restrictions, parents should be given the right to return the favor, right?

A kid refusing to adhere to curfew hours is 'getting in the way' of the parent, right? Right?

Or is this all a big double-standard?

 

[Insanity72]

Compared to some of the other stuff people have done to their parents because of restricts and such, this is a pretty good outcome

 

[EHKOS]

They should face jail time regardless. Drugging someone standing between you and something you want because you can't just wait until the morning is not the mark of a well adjusted individual.

I guess now the girls made their point of how MATURE they are and how SAFE it is to let them roam around the internet.

Look at it the other way: Their parents treated them like small children, and it made them act like small children, what a surprise...

You think that an acceptable response to a curfew (And 10PM is very generous) is to drug the authority figure so you have free reign?

I'm going to play devils advocate and say yes. If someone is in your way, it's not the worst thing in the world to non-violently subdue them. At least it isn't another "Teen kills mother for taking away his keyboard" story. People get pissed when they can't have their way. And don't call it immature, the republicans of the US are doing the same damn thing.

Greets!

Nice.

I am curious how you feel about drugging kids to make sure they stay within curfew hours.

Surely, making sure they are sleeping by a certain time by using medication is reasonable right? I mean if the kids are allowed drug their parents non-violently to circumvent these restrictions, parents should be given the right to return the favor, right?

A kid refusing to adhere to curfew hours is 'getting in the way' of the parent, right? Right?

Or is this all a big double-standard?

It wouldn't be a terrible idea. Parents use a different method, by threatening usually, but I don't think people would throw too much of a fit if childrens "Sleeping Shots" were introduced. Parents also use Ritilan to keep their kids in line.

 

[Belated]

You wouldn't care if your child murdered someone or was a contract killer? That is a serious issue within itself, so you wouldn't care if your child was a serious threat to other people? Would you care if your child was a serious threat to your friends or their children? Where do you draw the line?

That's not what I meant by "I wouldn't care..." of course I would "care". Yeah it would be terrible and I'd be disappointed in him. But for one, everybody is capable of murder. Everybody. And with the right damage, the right thing to really break you down, even you could kill someone. One terrible mistake that he would forever regret? No, that would not make me hate my kid. Psychosis? Serial killer? Sociopath? Okay, then I'd have him committed. If my child was like this [http://anarchistsoccermom.blogspot.com/2012/12/thinking-unthinkable.html?m=1]? Sure, fair enough. But if he's not a psycho, if he just made the biggest mistake of his life in the heat of the moment? Or if he's a career criminal? No, I wouldn't betray him. Family first.

The only time it's okay to betray family is in the interest of protecting yourself after they've betrayed you. Parents who bring their kids to small claims court over some trivial bill or rent disgust me. What happened to the parents who truly loved their kids? What happened to the parents who would protect their kids no matter what? What happened to the parents who would do anything for their kids?

And contract killers are not the same as serial killers. They don't do it for fun, they do it for money, and typically they work for organized crime. When you think about it really, the contract killer's just the middle man. Who's worse? The guy who did the job, or the guy who hired him? I'm not saying it's a good thing to do, but I wouldn't turn in my own son if he did it.

But the reason I use the contract killer example is because, when I was just a child, and my mom was in the mid stages of her cancer, she told me on the hospital bed that she would always love me no matter what. When I asked, "Even if I was a contract killer?" (in the same way people on the internet bring up Nazis as an extreme example), she told me, "Yes. I wouldn't approve of it, and I'd try to get you to change your ways, but I would still love you." And my father loves me just as much. He takes care of me, puts up with my shortcomings, and even hugs me when I cry.

I owe my own children the same love my mother and father gave me. That's what it means to be a real parent. Unconditional love. It means exactly that. Unconditional. Without conditions. It's time to bring back REAL parents. Parents like the one I have, and the one I had.

 

[Brutal Peanut]

[small]Well, I guess it's about time to call and make an appointment to have my tubes tied.[/small]

For some reason, it kind of bothers me that people think this is no big deal. What if one of the parents had over-dosed and died because of something they had used and used too much of? The idea that there could be a copy-cat of these two girls accidentally killing his/her parent or guardian because he/she wanted more internet time, which they probably had many hours of already, gives me the chills.

Ten o'clock in the evening is not an unreasonable curfew for electronic entertainment that they've probably been glued to most of the day already. Wanting your kid to play a board game with a friend or read a book for a while, or just get adequate sleep for the next day - is not bad parenting. As far as I am concerned what those girls did was dangerous, I don't think jail-time is particularly necessary; but this isn't amusing or okay either.

 

[Kopikatsu]

[small]Well, I guess it's about time to call and make an appointment to have my tubes tied.[/small]

For some reason, it kind of bothers me that people think this is no big deal. What if one of the parents had over-dosed and died because of something they had used and used too much of? The idea that there could be a copy-cat of these two girls accidentally killing his/her parent or guardian because he/she wanted more internet time, which they probably had many hours of already, gives me the chills.

Ten o'clock in the evening is not an unreasonable curfew for electronic entertainment that they've probably been glued to most of the day already. Wanting your kid to play a board game with a friend or read a book for a while, or just get adequate sleep for the next day - is not bad parenting. As far as I am concerned what those girls did was dangerous, I don't think jail-time is particularly necessary; but this isn't amusing or okay either.

Probably because the girls stuck it to the man by fighting against authoritative restrictions.

There are a lot of people on the faaaaaaaaar left on the Escapist. Comes with the territory, I guess, but there is definitely such a thing as too much freedom.