internet age limit

thebaz · 23-06-2006 11:53AM #1

What age do you think children should be allowed access the internet unsupervised ?
Should age restrictions be put in place ?
I think it is difficult to resrict minors from accessing internet, and in general they can learn from it and benefit from internet access , even unsupvised as long as they are aware of potential pitfalls, such as on-line predators and pervs, porn etc.
Many 12 - 16 year olds access Bebo unsupervised, and like mobile phone usage i don't think this can be stopped, if anything kids will start going online earlier.
This post, follows the assumption by many that it is bad practice to let 14 year olds online unsupervised , on the MySpace lawsuit thread.

Gone West · 23-06-2006 11:54AM

age limit?
got the right word there?

BMH · 23-06-2006 11:57AM

I don't think age should be the factor. Mental health appears to be what's wrong with those getting fiddled every day.

dbnavan · 23-06-2006 11:59AM

I dont think my kids will get online Unsupervised till 15 or 16

Terry · 23-06-2006 12:00PM

proper use of the content advisor and the blocking of certain sites should be properly utilised.
the internet is a great resource for education, but kids shouldn't be allowed access to forums and myspace/bebo type sites.
it's hard to put an age limit on it because all kids are different.
there are some 15 year olds here who use this forum responsibly, but there are 17 year olds who may be susceptible to perverts.

CurtisHeaven · 23-06-2006 12:02PM

I don't agree on an age limit being put on the internet. If parents spent the money on decent parental controls everything their kids do can be monitored down to what websites have been visited and what websites they have tried to visit and also what emails they have been recieving and sending.
If all parents took these precautions the internet would be a much safer place for kids.

grimloch · 23-06-2006 12:03PM

Both myself and my sister have had unsupervised access for a few years now. My sister probably first started when she was perhaps twelve or thirteen and it was no problem whatsoever. Granted this was a bit before Bebo/Myspace et al.

The problem isn't necessarily the age, my sister just isn't a jackass and she knows much better than to fall into traps that others have fallen into. I'm not saying that everyone under the age of sixteen using the internet is a jackass or has been brought up badly or lacks common sense, merely that it should depend on the child.

aidan_walsh · 23-06-2006 12:05PM

age limit?
got the right word there?

Its called a lower limit.

If parents spent the money on decent parental controls everything their kids do can be monitored down to what websites have been visited and what websites they have tried to visit and also what emails they have been recieving and sending.
If all parents took these precautions the internet would be a much safer place for kids.

Most parents have much less of a clue than their children. There are fully grown adults out there who don't know how to use their phone or program a VCR, how are they going to set up these restrictions?

Zapp Brannigan · 23-06-2006 12:06PM

I've used the internet since I was 12 unsupervised. Though I've always been mature and I treated the internet like it is, on a computer and I didn't try to meet up with people or any foolish stuff like that. I mainly just looked at Games Workshop stuff online, cos I was fascinated with that stuff at the time.

netwhizkid · 23-06-2006 12:13PM

I think that children from ages of 5 to thirteen shouldn’t really have access to the Internet but teenagers over 13 should as long as it is supervised using the correct softwares, which will block out undesirable sites. I myself have being on the Internet for the last 8 years since I was eleven. I have learned loads from it and what to avoid too.

Good nosing of what sites were visited by teenagers is essential to amok sure they aren't looking at unsuitable content. Then of course if they start staying one step ahead by clearing the cache and temp internet files the there can be trouble. The advice to parents is invest in monitoring and blocking software. The big trouble is most parents cannot even turn on the Computer and their children could be dealing in weapons of mass destruction for all they know.

CurtisHeaven · 23-06-2006 12:15PM

aidan_walsh wrote:

Its called a lower limit.

Most parents have much less of a clue than their children. There are fully grown adults out there who don't know how to use their phone or program a VCR, how are they going to set up these restrictions?

Well if parents can't use the internet themselves and don't take the time to learn to protect their children they shouldn't waste their money on a pc and should certainly not allow their young children online.....Thats bad parenting.

JC 2K3 · 23-06-2006 12:16PM

grimloch wrote:

Both myself and my sister have had unsupervised access for a few years now. My sister probably first started when she was perhaps twelve or thirteen and it was no problem whatsoever. Granted this was a bit before Bebo/Myspace et al.

The problem isn't necessarily the age, my sister just isn't a jackass and she knows much better than to fall into traps that others have fallen into. I'm not saying that everyone under the age of sixteen using the internet is a jackass or has been brought up badly or lacks common sense, merely that it should depend on the child.

Indeed, I'm 17, been using the internet since I was about 10/11 and interacting with online communities since I was about 13/14. It's common sense not to give strangers your personal details. Sure I accessed porn a few times when I shouldn't have, but then again kids do things they shouldn't anyway, I don't think porn is necessarily that damaging to horny teenagers, it just has a stigma attached to it that makes it seem like something awful.

CurtisHeaven wrote:

I don't agree on an age limit being put on the internet. If parents spent the money on decent parental controls everything their kids do can be monitored down to what websites have been visited and what websites they have tried to visit and also what emails they have been recieving and sending.
If all parents took these precautions the internet would be a much safer place for kids.

lol, parental control software. I don't think my parents ever bothered with it because they knew I'd get around it.

thebaz · 23-06-2006 12:52PM

Many 13 , 14 and 15 year olds are now using bebo and MySpace unrestriced .
I just don't buy the fact that these teenagers parents are "bad parents" cause they let them do so, as has been suggested by some here , particularly on the MySpace lawsuit thread.
Bebo is fun for younger teenagers, and probaly younger users as well , and i don't think parents can be labelled bad, if they let there children use these social networking sites, but do outline potential pitfalls.
Do you think the Bebo users would use bebo , if there parents were looking over there shoulder and reading every entry .
Bebo would collapse , teenagers want privacy !
Most teenagers have email accounts now, should there parents also read all there email , i don't think this would be a good idea for anyone, unless in crisis situations.

eamoss · 23-06-2006 12:57PM

I have been on the internet since I was about 8(god I cudnt go back to a 28k modem

) and I was never supervised. After a few years I went onto chat rooms out of boredom but there was always I line I never passed when giving out info(e.g my real/full name, any photos ect).

I just think if the kid is aware what type of ppl could be on the internet they will know not to give out too much detail about them selfs.

I think bebo is good, Like I have just finished school and I think bebo is a great way to keep in contact. But for 12yr olds

GrumPy · 23-06-2006 12:58PM

thebaz wrote:

bad practice to let 14 year olds online unsupervised

That is b0llox, I dont agree at all 14? There what, second years? I think that crap tbh.

Even if an age restriction was decided, how in the name of christ would they police it?

Creamy Goodness · 23-06-2006 01:03PM

tbh age isn't a factor. as someone said above it's mental health and how sensible the person is.

the old saying never take candy from a stranger comes to mind.

seamus · 23-06-2006 01:27PM

Removing access to the internet from a child is like telling a child that they can't read a book or watch TV because they're too young.

However, like TV or books, you should definitely supervise what it is they're experiencing, at least till they're 14/15.

In terms of predators, well I thinks that's a new (and probably short-lived) phenomenon. Up until the internet, most activities that your child got involved with were supervised by an adult (soccer, hurling, etc), or they were strictly one-way (TV, books, music). Now with the Internet you've got a form of entertainment which most people consider as one-way as the TV, but which in fact is two-way and completely unsupervised.

I don't have any children, but I'm a firm believer that if you educate your child correctly, and know what the child will or won't do, then your chances of hitting these problems are reduced. We were all told as kids that "Men who you don't know, asking you to get in their cars" were evil. (In actual fact, a child is much more likely to be molested by a family member, but you can't really protect against that initially). So too, must we educate children - "Not everyone is who they say they are on the Internet, no matter how nice they sound".

It's the fact that technology has passed so many parents by which contributes to this problem. Cries of "shut down the chatrooms" displays the complete ignorance (on behalf of the media too) of the issue at hand, and the way the technology works in general.

biko · 23-06-2006 01:32PM

As soon as my brats' little stubby fingers can order beer delivered to me from Tesco I'm happy. Besides, who's gonna send me porn links if I don't let them use the PC?

Bruscar Bán

b3t4 · 23-06-2006 01:58PM

I think there should be an age limit as to when a child can use the internet unsupervised and I believe this age to be 18. After all this is the age when a child is no longer a child and is considered an adult. Yes, I am aware that there are very mature 15, 16 and 17 year olds out there but in the eyes of the law you are still a child. This bugged the hell out of me when I was those ages but there was nada I could do about it. I do believe however that they should have access but in a controlled and supervised way as the internet is an amazing educational tool.

The thing is though that a child won’t automatically give out their real name and details. Real name and details will generally be exchanged once the child has become familiar with the internet and the people/person they are talking to. A pedophile will have to do as much preening as they do in real life as they would on a website or chat room. A pedophile will gain a child’s trust before they get any real details this is generally a long process.

As for the people here saying that parents should setup all the parental software they can, as someone else pointed out, what about those that don’t understand computers or anything about the environment? They probably have the computer so that their child/children can avail of the educational information available on the web or use it to type up projects. They aren’t being bad parents they are just doing their best. For these parents I would advise them to keep the computer in an area that has a lot of traffic, e.g. the sitting room, kitchen, until a child is past the age of 18. At 18 the then adult can make there own decisions in life or will probably move out

Also, seamus made a good point when he says that in normal social events that a child is involved in they are generally supervised by an adult. Why should the internet not be the same? What’s to stop the people who provide chat rooms from supervising or modding what goes on in them? Sure we even have modding on this website to prevent muppetry, could the same modding not be applied to chat rooms?

Also, how long did it take before people who use this website considered going along to a boards meet up? Do you know everyone on here? Do you really think you know people by what they post on this board alone?

A.

FranchisePlayer · 23-06-2006 02:09PM

Tbh I think bebo is just a paedophile haven lots of children give out there real names and address which is a bad idea.

Piste · 23-06-2006 02:22PM

I'm 15, and I've been using the internet unsupervised since I was 9 or 10. In fairness, parents have better things to be doing that giving up their time to sit down with their brat while they browse sites I think for children under 12 there should certainly be some content filtering software in place, but kids older than that got around it. My parents got a firewall/content filter when we got broadband, and I just used proxies until I disabled the content filter (and they still don't know about that) so spending money on those things for older cxhildren is a complete waste. As with everything we learn by expercience. I have no problem giving my name or age on the internet, but contact details are another story (that said I did once post my phone number in the boards irc channel) Another issue is privacy, most parents generally wouldn't read their teenager's texts or post, or listen in on their phone conversations or hang around with them when they're with their friends, so why should msn conversations or emails be any different? Children and teenagers quickly learn that that X on the top right hand corner of the screen is there for a reason and can be used to get out of things that are offended.

When I was younger my parents made me promise to tell them if I saw anything offensive online, luckily things don't offend me easily so I never had any issues.

simu · 23-06-2006 02:26PM

I don't see the problem with kids going online tbh. I don't think it's possible to keep an eye on every page they visit but once you have an idea of what sites they go on and once you warn them about paedophiles and so on (same way you would about people acting inappropriately irl), they should be grand.

nesf · 23-06-2006 02:33PM

What I'm really curious about with all this furore is the stats. Considering the vast numbers of children online how many are actually raped/etc? Is there a higher chance of it happening than the more "traditional routes", if you know what I mean?

You do need to be responsible with children being online etc, but a 13 year old going off and meeting some stranger without the parents knowing is not exactly something that reflects well on a parent. Nevermind a 10 or 11 year old. Maybe I'm a bit old fashioned in my thinking but the idea of 10-13 year olds being able to leave the house unsupervised to go meet up with whoever they want strikes me as not very good parenting tbh. If they are being left out on their own to meet whoever they want I don't think the internet is the real problem here.

Piste · 23-06-2006 02:47PM

I was hanging around in town with my friends when I was 13 and look how I turned out.

*twitches*

seamus · 23-06-2006 03:01PM

Piste wrote:

spending money on those things for older cxhildren is a complete waste.

Well, not entirely. It's a complete waste when you don't know how to use it. Think of it this way: if you bought a home alarm system off-the-shelf, and installed it yourself, hooking up the sensors to all of your windows and doors, and programming the zones yourself, do you think it would properly? Or do you think there would be some obvious gaps - sensors that don't work properly, other sensors that continually keep tripping?

The same applies here. Anything installed by someone who doesn't know what they're doing is instantly flawed.

Orion · 23-06-2006 03:06PM

When my kids start using the computer I'll be setting up a proxy like ClarkConnect which they'll have to connect through. I will use the content filter on it sensibly - not the way NetNazi etc do it - based on their maturity level not their age. You can keep your kids safe without being over-protective imo.

nesf · 23-06-2006 03:08PM

Macros42 wrote:

You can keep your kids safe without being over-protective imo.

I completely agree. You don't need to block and monitor everything, just like with books where the guideline age isn't necessarily the one you should follow for an individual child/teen.

nesf · 23-06-2006 03:09PM

seamus wrote:

Well, not entirely. It's a complete waste when you don't know how to use it. Think of it this way: if you bought a home alarm system off-the-shelf, and installed it yourself, hooking up the sensors to all of your windows and doors, and programming the zones yourself, do you think it would properly? Or do you think there would be some obvious gaps - sensors that don't work properly, other sensors that continually keep tripping?

The same applies here. Anything installed by someone who doesn't know what they're doing is instantly flawed.

The problem is that some of these products are being marketed as "fool-proof" systems where you simply insert a CD into the machine and now your children are encased in virtual bubblewrap. The people who will know that these aren't fool-proof are the ones who will be able to set it up properly, or at least know someone to ask to do it for them. So, it's a bit of a problem imho.

JC 2K3 · 23-06-2006 03:25PM

Content filtering programs are a waste as they are píss easy to get around if you have half a brain.

Then again, any teenager who would go out to meet a stranger off the internet obviously doesn't have half a brain in the first place so.......

Orion · 23-06-2006 03:44PM

JC 2K3 wrote:

Content filtering programs are a waste as they are píss easy to get around if you have half a brain.

But proxies aren't if you lock down the internet connection to use it. And if the kids don't have root access to the proxy server. ClarkConnect is a good one and if you're using XP or any flavour of Linux you can force internet traffic through it.

Admittedly this is beyond the average parent but it's what I'll be doing.

thebaz · 23-06-2006 04:06PM

it amazes me the differences in opinion, we have a balanced 15 year old online , and debating intelligently -- and others saying you should be 18 years of age to go online unsupervised. So you can smoke fags and have sex but not go online . Like it or not , many 14 year olds , are using bebo , and for 98 % i believe it is ok, as long as they are made aware of the dangers and threats online , for the 2% vulnerable , yes it is a problem , but by the same token should all children be locked up for the summer , and stay away from parks , cause of the threat of underage drinking and drugs .. Reality is sometimes not very nice, and there are nasty people out there , but a bit of balance goes along way

internet age limit

Comments