To what extent should parents be held responsible for the actions of their delinquent teenagers?

Question

Yahoo! Answers staff note: This is the real Miriam Stoppard. Look here for more detail: http://uk.blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-qT1KKPQoRKdVT4lowpJCljbFokkuIzI8?p=945

Answer 1

Whilst parents may like to keep tabs on their kids movements 24/7, it's just not practical or possible. Even if parents think they know all that their kids are getting up to, you can bet that a lot don't know half of it, even though they would probably disagree with this statement.

Unless parents keep kids on an unfeasibly tight rein, or enjoy a very close, open and honest relationship with their child, they are simply not in a position to oversee their actions and influences, and therefore cannot be held responsible for their child's actions.

We are all a product of our environment, and the person we become will be influenced by our family, peers, and experiences. Throughout teenage years, kids are very impressionable.

No matter how hard parents try to bring their kids up as they would like, they cannot be held fully accountable for the actions of a hormone packed teenager, who may be enjoying a new found freedom which in turn opens their eyes to new and exciting experiences, many of which will seem more appealing than studying for exams. For some there will be no end of possibilities which will serve as a welcome distraction from the stresses of studying, or the prospect of pressure to engage in further education or find their own way in the big wide world by getting a job.

The foundations for the basic structure of morality should have been in place for some time at this point, and the type of person the teenager will become will have started to take shape. However, in opposition to this are the various temptations which teenage life inevitably throws up. Many will see other kids doing things and will join in or copy them purely to conform and fit in. It's all about social status within groups. No kid wants to be the outcast, so many will be influenced by what others say and do. Most of this will happen away from the parents, who most often will not get to hear of it.

Once they do hear about things that they disapprove of, it will depend on their approach to tackling the problem, and their relationship and level of communication with their child which determines if they are the overriding influencing factor or not. This is really where the parents come back into the equation, but their ability to do so will rely on their approach during the earlier years of their child's life.

For these reasons, parents can share the responsibility for the actions of their child with the child's peers, although at this point much of their ability to have an influence will have been established long before any of the teenage problems have come to light.

Answer 2

I the question had have been asked 20 years ago i would have said yes without a second thought , but today im really not sure.

The country is changing and i cant help but feel its for the worse.

I work as a retailer in a shopping center and i observe the kids on a day to day basis and it amazes me to see how many of these kids have kids of thier own! , with the upturn in teenage pregnancy how can they teach "life lessons" morals and respect to thier offspring when they have not learned these lessons themselves, so can they be responsible because they are ignorant ?

Its also worth noting that the government has to play a part in all this , rules have been put in place to protect kids in abuse senarios , these same rules also protect those wayward kids that need correcting. The problem lies with action and consequence , as it stands most kids know there is little or no consequence for their actions , just ask the kids around the shopping center, phrases like "you cant do anything" or "the Police cant do anything" they know oh so well, and they are right , the Police have their hands tied and the community is powerless. It worries me to think that soon enough these teenagers will have kids of thier own, with no parenting skills to pass on you can almost see the deterioration of suburbia, neighbours from hell in every street.

I suppose the real answer to the question is yes , but unless parents are taught and not told how to look after their kids then to quite a large extent its unfair to shoulder the blame at the parents not everyone is a bad parent and i can imagine the heartbreak of being a responsible Father/Mother and seeing your child going off the rails and feeling totally helpless to correct the situation whilst keeping within the law , not every parent is a child psychologist.

Answer 3

Well children are made from there parents, and pick up there bad habits. Teenagers are only thought to do what there parent teach them, if parents are really strict with the children then the more the children will want to dis obey rules, but if they don't restrict them enough they also run loose causing all kinds of mayhem.

Parenting is a hard job and should be considered a lot before having a baby. Parents have to teach there kids no to strict but also not to freely, parents no matter how much the love them should let them go at what ever time the child decides they are responsible enough. Holding them under there rules etc means the children will not be in-dependant, and get shyer by the minute, its affect the child a lot even though no one may think it.

The parent should be held responsible for there actions because they only act depending on how they have bought up the child and what circumstances they live in. But in the other hand the child is there own person so they are also responsible for there actions. An even amount of responsibility should be taken by the teenagers and there parents until they move on/out and become really in-dependant with out parenting.

Answer 4

I believe they are mostly responsible. People only do bad things because they are fundamentally unhappy or have something missing in their life - hence I do not agree that single parents are always as good as 2-parents (rarely, this is not the case, and more power to those in this situation). If the child isn't shown respect by the parents, it will not learn how to respect others itself. However, the child must also know that the parents are the authority in their lives, otherwise the child will become spoilt and will walk all over the parents. Despite being the authority, the parents should also be open and willing to talk and spend time giving the child the attention it needs to mature properly. The parents do have a huge responsibility in bringing up a child, but get those 3 things right, and good things tend to follow.

I also believe that no-one really grows up. We're all children really, everyone has chips on their shoulders, just some more than others. It can lead to very harsh cycles of unhappy children bringing up unhappy children. It takes someone very special to be able to break that cycle and start a happy family.

That's my belief anyway.
Chezza

Answer 5

This will always be a difficult and emotive question depending on if you are a parent that thinks your children are perfect little angels that never do any wrong or the victim of a serious offence committed by a teenager.

It starts with the parent(s) being good role models and demonstrating clearly what is and is not acceptable behaviour in society.

Unfortunately with todays economic climate and the social expectations of youngsters it is difficult for parents to control the social interactions outside the sphere of parental control. External influences from peers and the challenges presented by an ever changing world can and often do have devastating results on an individual.

It is a very large learning curve for youngsters these days to survive the trials and tribulations of being a teenager, with the internal transitions that effect not only the body, but the mind as well. The need to fit in with their peers and the beginnings of the need to be recognised as attrative to the opposite sex is relatively new at this stage so the process of learning what attracts the opposite sex is a minefield and often very emotional.

Not withstanding these complex issues, there is still no excuse for offences to be consistently committed by these members of society.

I am of the view that everyone is entitled to one mistake, however that is where the line should be drawn because then the parent(s) is/are fully aware of the situation and as long as that teenager is under the legal custody of the parent(s) they should be equally liable under the law.

If the parent(s) cannot cope then the child should be automatically made a ward or the court for a determined period of time or until that child is an adult and the appropriate order made by the courts with regard to who takes responsibility for the child, even if that means a care order. The simple explanation is "Not enough discipline!"

Yes, the parent(s) should be held just as responsible as the teenagers!

Answer 6

Parents need to set the ground rules from the beginning so that the teenager knows exactly where he/she stands. However, rules are often broken despite parents doing the best they can. Parents can't always be blamed. Some teenageers are so hormonal that there is nothing a parent can do. It's a trying time for both. Some parents are lucky to have teenagers that aren't as hormonal and respect the ground rules. At the end of the day, you have to look at the situation in question. What did the parents do/not do? What did the teenager do/not do? Every situation will be different and in some cases the parents should be held responsible. A delinquent teenager will do his/her own thing anyway and learn from the mistakes he/she makes. This is all part of the growing up process.

Answer 7

in today's world it seems theree are a lot of delinquent children and we ask who is responsible do we blame the parents. i say no we should blame the grand parents they are the ones who made ther kids into the parents they are and as we move down the line just think how much worse there kids will be. on the other hand maybe we should blame the government they are the ones who have introduced so many child protection laws that prevent not only the parents from punishing there children but end up leaving the police powerless as well so instead of thinking up new softly softly schemes to enhance the lives of these kids who run the streets of our country and terrorise the decent folks? may be the government should sit back and think what have we done get rid of some of the laws we have introduced and give the power back to the parents, schools and the police as a wise parent once said a good clip round the ear never done anybody any harm. the evidence is there for all to see as we progress through the years the statistics surely prove the governments methods don't work as we look at today's kids who will be tomorrows parents how bad will it have to get before the governments realise this is not working. yes we need child protection laws BUT WHO IS PROTECTING THE PARENTS.

Answer 8

Although my immediate response was 'yes', it does depend upon other factors. For example, have any of the rest of the family been in trouble with the law?
Does the teenager have any mental problems? Are they having problems at school?
Are drugs involved?

Although I am not always convinced by therapy (I do not believe it is the panacaea that people claim it can be), I think that, in some cases, it could be worthwhile.

I hope to heaven I am not bringing up some delinquent teenagers (my two are 7 and 13) and am doing all I can to explain to them that actions have consequences. However, if one of them does, for example, carry out graffitti, I would expect to get fined for the clean-up. And my child would have to pay me back - or else! And if I found out they had been stealing, I would ensure they went back to where the stuff came from to apologise (hopefully I would find out before the police!)

That may sound harsh, but I feel the parents do need to bear some of the punishments. Especially if the children still live at home! And I hope my children realise just how much I love them! I have not smacked my daughter (ever) and, although I did smack my son when he was younger, I have not had to since he was diagnosed with ADHD (tablets have given me two children in one - I love them both, but there is one I do not like!)

Children must learn self-discipline, the difference between right and wrong, that the world does not revolve around them, that money does not 'grow on trees', that you cannot have everything you want - and that actions have consequences. However, they need to learn these in a loving and nurturing environment. Otherwise they may well not learn the lessons at all!

Answer 9

Once young people reach the age of 18 society accepts them as adults. At that age they are as fully responsible for their own actions as any of us are, and the parents have no right to praise or blame any more. They can give assistance, help or guidance if they wish, but the son/daughter can accept or reject the help, advice etc as they would that of any other adult. If however the child remains economically dependent on the parent, it would be a freely entered into agreement between the two of them, but should not imply necessarily that the parent could exert control over the offspring's actions just because they supported them financially.

Between the ages of 13 and 16, the parent is expected to support the child, the child is still in full time education. If the children misbehave, they are responsible, because (providing there are no special circumstances) they are considered to be old enough to know the difference between right and wrong. Clearly, they should have normal freedom of action, travelling and socialising, without adult supervision. This is part of the process of growing up. In the nature of things, some children will overstep the mark. The parent is responsible for ensuring as well as they reasonably can that the child attends school, and knows how to behave in various situations. The parent is responsible for their own actions. If these are such that they do not encourage the child to attend school and behave in a socially acceptable way, if they encourage bad behaviour, or if they set a bad example by behaving badly themselves, then they are culpable. But if they do what any reasonable parent would do to bring up and support their child, they should not be held responsible for his actions.

In between the ages of 16 and 18, the parent still has some responsibility for care and control of the child, especially if they have some economic control because the child is not yet fully able to support himself. But it should be recognised that for all practical purposes the parent has no real control. It all depends on the relationship between the parent and child, the extent the child would be responsive to parental guidance. The parent should not be held responsible if the relationship is poor, this might not be the fault of the parent, this period of life can be difficult for both parties.

I would say that from 16 up, if the child lives in the parent's house, the parent can set ground rules. But when it comes down to it, if the child does not conform, the only real power the parent has is to expel the child from the parental home. Obviously many parents would be loath to do this. Making the parent responsible for behaviour over which they cannot have any real control could lead to a worsening of the situation, of the relationship between parent and child, and of the delinquency. It could lead to more expulsions when parents felt they had no option if they were to avoid the stress and pressure of impossible demands.

So my answer is that parents should not be held responsible for their delinquent teenagers to any great extent. Parents who are struggling should be given support and help. Those few parents who are totally or viciously delinquent themselves, who use or abuse their children, neglect, brutalise or demoralise them, should be held culpable. But it would have to be very gross, because even a weak parent is normally a better hope and help for a child, than the "care" of strangers.

Blame and shame cannot have a positive effect on either the delinquent child, the struggling parent, or the parent who may have given up defeated. It can only be counter productive. No parent is perfect, nor should they be expected to be.

Answer 10

Parents in this day and age should be aware of their DNA. Saying that they should be able to detect signs of how they were as children and be aware of the ever changing culture of teenagers. So much neglect on teenagers happens out of arrogance and this works both ways. When you look at the number of hours a parent spends TEACHING their child it is no wonder why children just run awol! Sadly it is ones work commitments which is the problem. Gone are the days when a kid would run in from school and Mum was trying out a new cookery recipe. Gone are the days when Dad was fixing the car etc. Today time is money and if the kids are around then something is wrong! Parents are not responsible for todays delinquent teenagers, rather the bills one has to pay just to avoid eviction, the cold, starvation. The rat run is the cause, as all teenagers want to do is relate with an older generation and all they have is their teachers at school as they listen and speak because they are PAID to!

Answer 11

To the extent that is justified and fair given the situation the family is in. If for example the parents are absent and have a poor relationship with their child then punishing them however tempting will solve nothing. All you have then taught the child is that somebody else will take the rap for their actions. This is the opposite of what you should be trying to make them understand which is as an adult you are responsible for your own actions and must accept the consequences that follow. However ignoring the parents completely and considering only the child possibly means ignoring one of the major contributors to the child's behaviour. The question is too open, the answer can only be that it depends on many factors. In my opinion there will be few occasions where punishing a parent for the actions of their child would achieve the aim of making the bad behaviour less frequent.