Am I the only person that has a real big problem with software like this?

[vlastimil]

In my opinion, it may be ok to monitor the child's location. The parent should explain to them that this is for their own safety.

Anything else and it is invasion of privacy. It does not matter that these are your own kids, they are still human beings and they should be able to have secrets.

And while the child-spying may work for a couple of years, it will eventually stop working. The kids will find out what is happening and will tell each other how to fool the system. They will develop methods to workaround the thing. They won't trust their parents anymore, who will live in a happy ignorance of what is really going on.

Parenting cannot be outsourced, if less time and energy is invested, the child will suffer. If a technology improves the situation for one party (the parent) and worsens it for the other party (the child), it will fail.

[wraith808]

It's all fine and dandy to talk about "good parenting" and "proper supervision" and have lofty ideals, but the reality is that no matter how hard you try, you'll never be able to live up to that 100% of the time. An app can help possibly catch a problematic situation when (not if) your attention lapses.

-Renegade (October 05, 2013, 10:21 PM)

This.  Experience will tell you... this.

Anything else and it is invasion of privacy. It does not matter that these are your own kids, they are still human beings and they should be able to have secrets.

-vlastimil (October 06, 2013, 03:15 AM)

Wrong answer.  At least to me.  Minimal stuff, yes.  But no, no secrets as long as they are in my care- mostly because until confronted with the situation, they don't know what to keep secret.  I know this from experience in my own childhood.  I kept things to myself because I thought they were my fault and my problem.  When my parents should have known.

Some measure of privacy, perhaps.  Minor stuff like I bought you a present, sure.  But you should be able to have a relationship with your child where secrets are unnecessary.  They are not a measure of being human.  Humans don't *have* to have secrets.  It's when you want to lie about something, or think that you're doing something wrong or that something is wrong that secrets come to the fore.  And in those cases are exactly when children need parents.

[mouser]

I can see the grey lines for very young kids, but i have to agree with vlastimill -- a child should be able to have secrets -- to have a private diary, etc.

Wraith the cases you brought up, about things you kept to yourself because you thought they were your fault/problem.  That's something completely different. That's a case best avoided by having a close open relationship with parent who tries their best to understand the struggles of the child.

That is different from saying that one is going to secretly spy on all things a child says and does.  In order to grow and mature, even children need to be able to have private discussions with friends, etc. If when I was just entering my teenage years I had discovered that my parents were secretly listening to every conversation/communication i had, i would have gone ballistic.

I can't imagine the damage it would have done to my relationship with my parents.  That's something you really need to consider if you are secretly monitoring your child's activities.

Again, this is different from having an 8yr old child who you arent sure is mature enough for a cell phone, and making an clear agreement with them that you are going to be checking their internet browsing history in exchange for letting them have the phone.  That's not really spying, that's more like having a supervision agreement with someone who understands they are playing with a dangerous instrument and may not be ready for it.

My view is that when a child becomes old enough to object to you reading their emails and checking their browsing history, they are probably mature enough that you should let them have their privacy -- barring some serious evidence of danger.

[wraith808]

I'll give a real-life example.  A friend of my son's has his own room in the basement.  The parents rarely go down there.  They don't keep track of what he does, after all, he's 16 right?  His girlfriend became more and more possessive.  Around them, she was great.  But more and more he started to get in over his head, and his parents knew nothing.

By the time they found out about it, she was coming over during the time when she was most likely to get pregnant to try to get pregnant.  After he decided to break up with her one time, she lured him down to the lake to try to have sex with him, and when he wouldn't broke his foot (and he lied to them about it).

Don't get me wrong- they have a pretty close knit family, and a very good family relationship.  But by the time this started happening, he didn't know how to tell them.  And the funny thing is that we had a good idea that things were off the rails.  Why?  Because, as some other parents put it, we're 'too involved in our children's lives', and my son had already told me about it, and that the situation was the reason that he didn't hang out with his friend at the time.

Like I said above, I don't spend the time to go through everything my children do like some.  But I am as involved as my responsibility for my children says that I should be.  Which it seems is a lot more than some think should be.  But it minimizes the chances that one day I'm going to have someone else tell me something that I should have known about my children.

And again, the most important part- I respect and listen to my children.  That seems to be a real fact that people ignore in this conversation.

[Renegade]

It might be worth noting that not all kids are made from cookie-cutters, and they're not all the same. Some kids probably need more attention/monitoring than others.

(Cynical rant about state-sponsored schools being cookie-cutters omitted.)

[wraith808]

It might be worth noting that not all kids are made from cookie-cutters, and they're not all the same. Some kids probably need more attention/monitoring than others.

-Renegade (October 06, 2013, 11:10 AM)

That's a very good point- and a part of that equation of paying attention.

(Cynical rant about state-sponsored schools being cookie-cutters omitted.)

-Renegade (October 06, 2013, 11:10 AM)

Good... because then I'd have to join you.

[TaoPhoenix]

...  I mean... that you'd want to prevent people from making things based on what they could be used for...

...just saying...  (there's no devil emote for devil's advocate... hmm...)

-wraith808 (October 05, 2013, 04:29 PM)

Hmm. Well first of all Wraith, thanks for taking the "difficult" side of this discussion on a board with a strong emphasis on free speech!

However, somewhere about page 2 of the thread another new problem occurred to me!

These kinds of apps only have use "in the Cry Wolf" scenario when you think the kid is at risk. But when did we decide in our "test cases" that the *evildoer was ... stupid*? I'll even be nice and not count the "hacking" scenario. Isn't minute 33 of any 43 min drama "throwing the GPS phone away into the bushes"? And when the script writer thinks of it and allows another 10 min for it, I just wondered why a 2 man team isn't doing the evildoing? One man is the "GPS decoy" who just sits in the "approved spot" with the phone while the other does the evil?

Isn't THAT the flaw?

[TaoPhoenix]

But again, going back to what I've been harping on about age... Is it a bad idea to monitor small children that are prone to getting lost?

-Renegade (October 05, 2013, 08:55 PM)

Yes. Because the "trouble spots" are "in reverse, aka Black Sheep or Cry Wolf".

99.44% of the markers will be False Negatives.

The whole social system was designed on "hand-offs". Drop your kid at School, 7-9 classes depending on your school's version, pick your kid up at school. Or, with a bus involved, the only "hot spot" is at like 4PM when the kid is supposed to be on the bus but any really grade A *kid's bus driver* (as opposed to bored city drivers who don't care!) knows their route. So the driver Maydays the Principal on the Red Line if X kid isn't there before the bus has to leave.

So there is too small of a use % for Always On monitoring. Hence why we're all nervous that the Dev isn't holding a hole card separate from the sales ad copy.

[app103]

So, how many of you here have had your privacy violated by a spying parent that thought they had the right to do that? How many of you had a parent that went rummaging through your "private thoughts" looking for something to hang you for? How many of you can really speak from the violated child's point of view? How many of you know first hand how damaging that is to a child, the relationship with that parent, what it does to any trust that child has in that parent, and how difficult it is to fix the damage once it is done? How many of you know first hand what happens after the child finds out?

Let's see a show of hands.

Am I the only one with my hand up?

For those of you that couldn't put your hand up, let me tell you what it feels like. It's mental and emotional rape. It shattered any and all trust I had in that parent. I felt set up, betrayed. And I never got over it. And our relationship has never recovered. That parent instantly became the last person in the world I would open up to and share anything with, the last person in the world I would go to for help if I was in trouble. And oh, boy, did I get into a ton of trouble in the years that followed. To be perfectly honest, I am pretty lucky to be alive today.

You want to go there with your kids? You think it will be different? You think somehow you are a better parent or your kids won't react like I did when you betray their trust in you? You think they will get over it and it won't do permanent damage to them or your relationship with them? You think they will still care what you think and feel about anything that has to do with them and their life, afterwards? You think they will still want your respect? Work hard to live up to your expectations? Try not to disappoint you?

I hope for your sake and the sake of your kids that you are right. But if you are wrong, don't say nobody ever warned you.

[wraith808]

So, how many of you here have had your privacy violated by a spying parent that thought they had the right to do that? How many of you had a parent that went rummaging through your "private thoughts" looking for something to hang you for? How many of you can really speak from the violated child's point of view? How many of you know first hand how damaging that is to a child, the relationship with that parent, what it does to any trust that child has in that parent, and how difficult it is to fix the damage once it is done? How many of you know first hand what happens after the child finds out?

Let's see a show of hands.

Am I the only one with my hand up?

-app103 (October 06, 2013, 12:58 PM)

Me.  And though I was mad at the time, in retrospect, it saved my life.

[Stoic Joker]

Let's see a show of hands.

Am I the only one with my hand up?

-app103 (October 06, 2013, 12:58 PM)

Nope...me too, and in my case the breach of privacy radically exacerbated the situation. It also forced me to up my game because trust was lost for many years after for one parent...and never again for the other.

[wraith808]

And so, what this proves is that situations are different, as are parents.

And again, the most important part- I respect and listen to my children.  That seems to be a real fact that people ignore in this conversation.

-wraith808 (October 06, 2013, 10:54 AM)

[cmpm]

I can only say what we did with our kids. And what I did when I was younger.

We (my wife and I), made it a point to be honest with our 2 boys. And made it a point to see that they were and even now to stay honest in our communication and living. And yeah, we all blow it sometimes.

Both of our boys were into the net and computers early in their lives. And yes we found out they were looking at porn and other stuff. Not by spying on them, but we found out anyway. Common sense really. I told them both that I could not stop them from looking at it. I have looked at it too. But, I explained that if you or anyone looks at porn too much it will affect your good judgment and eventually rule your thinking. Same as with most anything I suppose. So, basically, some sound smart thinking about where you want your mind to develop.

We talked and still talk, treating them with respect for privacy and trust. And we expect them to do the same or better with us. We will point out lies if they happen, and expect the same toward us. To speak of lies as not telling the truth, rather then calling anyone a liar. Or for that matter, we have a rule to never do any name-calling. And yeah we all have broken that rule. And still try our best not to, like anything else we try to live.

Far from perfect, but we do enjoy each others company.

Our boys are well past 18, and we still build on what we have developed in our relationships. They are still our children, and always will be. And we still have to live with respect to each other.

We don't have any girls, so I can't comment on that, since I don't have any experience being the father of a girl. May be different or not, I just can't say.

[TaoPhoenix]

I'll add a new angle:
From the "data logging" point of view, that data will travel around and esp in the "great age switchover" at 18 and 21, that data could be ordered by the cops for all kinds of other uses!

Just an easy couple:
- Automated tickets for parents speeding "without an emergency". X % of Dads have "Leadfeet"!
- contacts - because the guy your kid knew at say 16 might begin to slide and get in trouble at 19 and then the phone data could be used as criminal evidence since they seem to magically be finding exceptions to search and seizure rules!

[Renegade]

I'll add a new angle:
From the "data logging" point of view, that data will travel around and esp in the "great age switchover" at 18 and 21, that data could be ordered by the cops for all kinds of other uses!

-TaoPhoenix (October 07, 2013, 03:19 AM)

You're crossing over into the adult area. That's an entirely different topic from kids. Spying on adult children is, well, reprehensible at best.

Just an easy couple:
- Automated tickets for parents speeding "without an emergency". X % of Dads have "Leadfeet"!

-TaoPhoenix (October 07, 2013, 03:19 AM)

Which is why any data collected shouldn't be shared outside the family. What kind of moron would log data and give it to the police?

- contacts - because the guy your kid knew at say 16 might begin to slide and get in trouble at 19 and then the phone data could be used as criminal evidence since they seem to magically be finding exceptions to search and seizure rules!

-TaoPhoenix (October 07, 2013, 03:19 AM)

All the more reason to scale back any monitoring as kids get older.

I've started with perfectly innocent links, and within a half dozen clicks I've inadvertently ended up at some seriously sick, disturbed, demented perversions. (No - I don't mean pron.) There are gateways out there that young kids really shouldn't be getting into. Being able to control or limit that for kids is just being responsible. However... that can't go on forever. The reigns must be slowly loosened until you finally let go. Nobody has any business putting reigns on another adult.

[TaoPhoenix]

Which is why any data collected shouldn't be shared outside the family. What kind of moron would log data and give it to the police?

-Renegade (October 07, 2013, 04:28 AM)

Okay Renny you're a little fiery, but "moron" is a little harsh.

The US is trying to "batch laws" like:
1. "All kids must be monitored 'For their safety' "
2. "If you don't turn over your kid's location data, you are a criminal".

So when it's not a choice, you're not a "moron". And yes I have seen "Combo Laws" like that all the time in these areas.

[Renegade]

Okay Renny you're a little fiery, but "moron" is a little harsh.

The US is trying to "batch laws" like:
1. "All kids must be monitored 'For their safety' "
2. "If you don't turn over your kid's location data, you are a criminal".

So when it's not a choice, you're not a "moron". And yes I have seen "Combo Laws" like that all the time in these areas.

-TaoPhoenix (October 07, 2013, 05:32 AM)

Moron is harsh? Pfft! Not far enough! It's not YOU turning it over... it's a bunch of moron criminals STEALING the information.

I'm not blaming the victim there.

But yeah, that's pretty disgusting. I'd not heard of any of that legislation before. "All kids must be monitored"? Wow. That's crazy enough. Add in #2 there and holy cripes...

Got a link for any of that? I see truckloads of this out-of-control-police-state stuff all the time, but I'd not heard of that particular bit of insanity.

[TaoPhoenix]

But yeah, that's pretty disgusting. I'd not heard of any of that legislation before. "All kids must be monitored"? Wow. That's crazy enough. Add in #2 there and holy cripes...

Got a link for any of that? I see truckloads of this out-of-control-police-state stuff all the time, but I'd not heard of that particular bit of insanity.

-Renegade (October 07, 2013, 06:00 AM)

Not precisely that, but in a quick min search I have these. And this stuff catches my eye so I post a lot of it here.

---

http://www.cnn.com/2...ial-media/index.html
California school district hires firm to monitor students' social media

Followed by this one with cute reverse flaws that will make you laugh:
http://phys.org/news...nia-kids-online.html
'Eraser' law will let California kids scrub online past

Aka "That's Right, Forget Renny Jr. Now take this name down and make sure you scrub it, okay? Renny Jr. And keep that in a nice list where we can ask you if you are complying!" Uh...

A NY Times version of this thread:
http://www.nytimes.c...et-the-dog.html?_r=0

Or this:
http://www.ocregiste...tudents-program.html
Kids who skip school are tracked by GPS
"...Seventh- and eighth-graders with four unexcused absences or more this school year are assigned to carry a handheld GPS device, about the size of a cell phone."

So yeah, they are clawing at all that.

[Renegade]

Kids who skip school are tracked by GPS
"...Seventh- and eighth-graders with four unexcused absences or more this school year are assigned to carry a handheld GPS device, about the size of a cell phone."

-TaoPhoenix (October 07, 2013, 07:42 AM)

Dammit! I fell in the river again. Got a new GPS?

Ooops... Spilt gasoline all over myself. Totally soaked my pocket with my GPS in it. Tried to save it, but my cigarette fell on it when I took it out. What? You're angry? You should be happy that I wasn't hurt! Think of the children!

The state has ZERO businesses monitoring children.

[app103]

In my very state, Montclair State University was the first college in the country to require students to purchase a cell phone from the school (it's included in the cost of tuition), even if they already have a cell phone. The purpose of this "school phone" is so campus police can track students via GPS.

It's supposed to be for their own safety....protecting "kids", blah, blah, blah. But as we all know, most college "kids" aren't technically kids any more. They are adults, over the age of 18. When the program started, turning on the GPS was at the student's option, and if they didn't turn it off after 20 minutes, campus police would be dispatched to their location. It's a "safety thing".

http://usatoday30.us...lair-state-gps_N.htm

They say that a frog in a pot of water doesn't notice it's being cooked to death if you heat the water slowly.

So, the first step is making the phones mandatory to own. Next would be mandatory to carry, then mandatory to have turned on.

And I guess it's no big deal to someone that has been tracked by their parents since birth to continue to be tracked by police, as adults, when they go off to college.

[wraith808]

I've started with perfectly innocent links, and within a half dozen clicks I've inadvertently ended up at some seriously sick, disturbed, demented perversions. (No - I don't mean pron.) There are gateways out there that young kids really shouldn't be getting into. Being able to control or limit that for kids is just being responsible. However... that can't go on forever. The reigns must be slowly loosened until you finally let go. Nobody has any business putting reigns on another adult.

-Renegade (October 07, 2013, 04:28 AM)

This.  As my children have become older, there's very little that we still do at 16.  A little more at 12, but not that much.

And I guess it's no big deal to someone that has been tracked by their parents since birth to continue to be tracked by police, as adults, when they go off to college.

-app103 (October 07, 2013, 08:17 AM)

And... you're ignoring that statement above.  That a parent that does use it has the responsibility to talk to their kids about it, and why, and when it's not acceptable.

[y0himba]

My children know they have absolutely no expectation of privacy when it comes to the Internet, their phones, the television Etc.  I monitor them, and then counsel them. After so long  being monitored, it has actually had the effect of creating trust and respect between my children and I, as well as teaching right from wrong.  When I was a child, we didn't have the devices and access we do now, yet I still was monitored and had no privacy.  As a child it got under my skin due to the fact our maturing brains work that way, but taught me the right lessons.  As an adult I see the benefits and reasons for monitoring.

I can honestly say, after watching what they do for so long, that I monitor them now more for keeping them away from links or people that specifically prey on children.  Whether it be for monetary reasons or for other, more sick reasons.

[Renegade]

In my very state, Montclair State University was the first college in the country to require students to purchase a cell phone from the school (it's included in the cost of tuition), even if they already have a cell phone. The purpose of this "school phone" is so campus police can track students via GPS.

-app103 (October 07, 2013, 08:17 AM)

Because even if you're a 6' 2" 220 lb muscle-bound, kung-fu fighting 18-year old, it would be unfair if you didn't have to buy one while everyone else did...

God... Requiring? Including in the cost of tuition? Cripes... WTF is wrong with NOT forcing people to buy crap they don't want?

It's supposed to be for their own safety....protecting "kids", blah, blah, blah.

-app103 (October 07, 2013, 08:17 AM)

Sigh...

But as we all know, most college "kids" aren't technically kids any more. They are adults, over the age of 18. When the program started, turning on the GPS was at the student's option, and if they didn't turn it off after 20 minutes, campus police would be dispatched to their location. It's a "safety thing".

http://usatoday30.us...lair-state-gps_N.htm

-app103 (October 07, 2013, 08:17 AM)

I don't mind if other people want to do that. Great. Wonderful. Awesome. Good for them.

But forcing everyone?

Like you said - they're adults. They can make their own decisions, even if those decisions don't turn out all rainbow farting unicorns and leprechaun's playing AC/DC while they slide down the unicorn farts into their pots of gold...

They say that a frog in a pot of water doesn't notice it's being cooked to death if you heat the water slowly.

So, the first step is making the phones mandatory to own. Next would be mandatory to carry, then mandatory to have turned on.

-app103 (October 07, 2013, 08:17 AM)

The problem here is MANDATORY. And that they are adults capable of making their own decisions.

And I guess it's no big deal to someone that has been tracked by their parents since birth to continue to be tracked by police, as adults, when they go off to college.

-app103 (October 07, 2013, 08:17 AM)

Why do you think I hate public education so much? It's nothing more than one big behaviour modification exercise. But, that aside... I did say I wouldn't rant about it...

There are a lot of people that aren't the best parents out there.

There are a lot of people that don't raise their children responsibly.

There are a lot of people that inflict serious injuries on their kids, either physically, mentally, or spiritually.

But taking a tool that can be used properly by loving, caring, and judicious parents isn't going to do any good.

It's not the tool - it's who uses it.

I wonder if any of these software vendors would put in a notice about the dangers of surveillance... Prolly not.

For individual parents, the amount of harm they can do with these kinds of tools is pretty much limited to their own household. This is a price that is paid for not having a totalitarian surveillance state.

For a state to have these kinds of tools though... That's another thread.

[40hz]

My original question wasn't whether or not it was appropriate or necessary to *watch* and set restrictions on a child we're personally responsible for. I don't think there's anyone here who would argue against that even if there are disagreements over the form and extent such supervision entails.

My question revolves more around a ubiquitous and total (via software) NSA-like scoop and recording of all actions taken during a particular activity such as email or web browsing. Because that is exactly what this software does.  

That's the difference (in my mind) between parenting and *electronic monitoring* - which is something I find completely misguided at best, and utterly reprehensible in practice.

While it may "take a village" to raise a child (and I have my doubts about that theory folk mantra as well) it certainly doesn't require software and an electronic device to do it.

You can't attempt to automate social responsibility or parenting without losing some of our humanity in the process.  

[Renegade]

My question revolves more around a ubiquitous and total (via software) NSA-like scoop and recording of all actions taken during a particular activity such as email or web browsing. Because that is exactly what this software does. 

-40hz (October 07, 2013, 09:25 AM)

Some kids probably need it.

I know one kid where the first time I met him I knew what he was all about... drugs, hanging out with friends, getting into the criminal side of all that... you can imagine.

His parents knew jack about it.

The kid's family had a rough go as dad got cancer and went downhill. He died. It sapped the family financially. Mom worked her butt off to try and save the house so that they'd have a place to live... i.e. Mom & dad weren't around much for him for understandable reasons.

Would some kind of monitoring have helped? Maybe. Could be the problem was there well beforehand.

Doesn't matter much though as there apparently wasn't any early prevention there, and he ended up being monitored by the state in juvie, etc. etc.

But for a full feature set of monitoring capabilities, well, using them all is probably a bad idea.

That's the difference (in my mind) between parenting and *electronic monitoring* - which is something I find completely misguided at best, and utterly reprehensible in practice.

-40hz (October 07, 2013, 09:25 AM)

So it's the degree? The "complete control" thing is what bothers you?

For the most part, I think that's right. (With the caveat that some kids actually NEED extreme discipline - I'm sure everyone knows the self-destructive types.)

While it may "take a village" to raise a child (and I have my doubts about that theory folk mantra as well) it certainly doesn't require software and an electronic device to do it.

-40hz (October 07, 2013, 09:25 AM)

I hate that saying.

You can't attempt to automate social responsibility or parenting without losing some of our humanity in the process. 

-40hz (October 07, 2013, 09:25 AM)

Some people will certainly try!

There are so, so many ways for us to surrender our humanity... And so, so many people willing to throw theirs away...

Keep us 'safe'! Yeah, right.