Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Irresponsible parents and smartphones

Options
  • 26-01-2018 2:51pm
    #1
    Mebuntu
    Registered Users Posts: 911 ✭✭✭


    Thousands of Irish children will have been looking forward to Christmas and the gift of a first smartphone. Now, a month later, they will all have been corrupted by what they have been able to view in the safety of their bedrooms. Some will have been in contact with undesirables. Some will have posted improper images of themselves. They will now be searching out and seeing for themselves all the things they have heard about on the news or through their friends.

    The irresponsibility of parents is staggering and then they moan and blame someone else or some organisation when they discover what their children have been up to or have been groomed. The parents know full well what is going on online and yet they give their children the tools to get access to it without batting an eyelid - often on the grounds that "everybody else's children are online".

    The Ryan Tubridy initiative on this subject is to be welcomed but, unfortunately, this cycle will go on until a law is enacted to make it illegal for a young child to be given a smartphone and that parents will be charged with wilful neglect if they do so.


«1

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Ubbquittious
    Registered Users Posts: 6,181 ✭✭✭Ubbquittious


    Ah go on you'll have another cup of tae


  • Options
    #3
    rgodard80a
    Registered Users Posts: 568 ✭✭✭rgodard80a


    Hysterical overreaction...

    Most parents give kids phones for safety.
    So they can ring home if they're in trouble/need anything, and parents can contact them.

    Inappropriate unrestricted social media use is the problem, not smart phones.


  • Options
    #4
    Mebuntu
    Registered Users Posts: 911 ✭✭✭Mebuntu


    rgodard80a wrote: »
    Most parents give kids phones for safety.
    So they can ring home if they're in trouble/need anything, and parents can contact them.
    Then give them simple call/text phones. They don't need smartphones to ring home.


  • Options
    #5
    rgodard80a
    Registered Users Posts: 568 ✭✭✭rgodard80a


    Mebuntu wrote: »
    Then give them simple call/text phones. They don't need smartphones to ring home.

    Better yet, bring them up in an Amish community with no TV, internet, modern technology.

    Like it or not, smartphones are a tool for better or worse.
    They're a camera, a method of looking up information on the web, listening to music and videos, connecting with friends, playing games, looking at the weather, etc.

    They'll also have tablets and probably smart tv's or web access via a game console.

    You can't legislate the problem away... only educate the kids on how to react when people (in real life and internet) approach them.

    Again... over reaction.
    What's your definition of a child ? What minimum age ?


  • Options
    #6
    Your Face
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,277 ✭✭✭Your Face


    Thank you OP, for thinking of the children.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Jawgap
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,297 ✭✭✭✭Jawgap


    I'm guessing the OP didn't get a phone for Christmas ;)


  • Options
    #8
    conorhal
    Registered Users Posts: 6,983 ✭✭✭conorhal


    rgodard80a wrote: »
    Better yet, bring them up in an Amish community with no TV, internet, modern technology.

    Like it or not, smartphones are a tool for better or worse.
    They're a camera, a method of looking up information on the web, listening to music and videos, connecting with friends, playing games, looking at the weather, etc.

    They'll also have tablets and probably smart tv's or web access via a game console.

    You can't legislate the problem away... only educate the kids on how to react when people (in real life and internet) approach them.

    Again... over reaction.
    What's your definition of a child ? What minimum age ?

    Perhaps it's just me then, but not in a million years would I hand an 9-8yr old (the age at which many kids are getting smart phones these days) unlimited access to hardcore pornography, the number one tool used to bully a child and a window into their bedroom for geezers like this:
    https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/man-who-coerced-young-girls-9-to-send-sexually-graphic-pictures-through-popular-social-media-apps-jailed-for-nineandahalf-years-36534039.html

    Frankly even the 'safety' argument is a thin one (IMO) considering the above. If safety is a concern I'd give them a call-only dumb phone, but even that smacks of parental paranoia turning free roaming kids into mollycoddled house cats on an overly short parental leash.

    Now I'm talking about pre-teen kids here just to clarify. If you don't know where you 6-12yr old is and they need to 'call home for help' something is wrong.


  • Options
    #9
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    Mebuntu wrote: »
    Thousands of Irish children will have been looking forward to Christmas and the gift of a first smartphone. Now, a month later, they will all have been corrupted by what they have been able to view in the safety of their bedrooms. Some will have been in contact with undesirables. Some will have posted improper images of themselves. They will now be searching out and seeing for themselves all the things they have heard about on the news or through their friends.

    The irresponsibility of parents is staggering and then they moan and blame someone else or some organisation when they discover what their children have been up to or have been groomed. The parents know full well what is going on online and yet they give their children the tools to get access to it without batting an eyelid - often on the grounds that "everybody else's children are online".

    The Ryan Tubridy initiative on this subject is to be welcomed but, unfortunately, this cycle will go on until a law is enacted to make it illegal for a young child to be given a smartphone and that parents will be charged with wilful neglect if they do so.

    Calm down Helen


  • Options
    #10
    whoopsadoodles
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,058 ✭✭✭whoopsadoodles


    Seeing as the world has been undergoing a technological revolution for some time now, wouldn't it be more prudent to educate children on the use of day to day technology rather than outlaw it completely?


  • Options
    #11
    rgodard80a
    Registered Users Posts: 568 ✭✭✭rgodard80a


    Then just lobby phone providers to provide a parental-lock mobile data plan.
    Restricts dodgy web sites.

    Or there's probably android apps that operate some parental control filtering.

    It's not a difficult problem.
    If the solution came from the top down, from the phone providers who provide the data plan, then it could solve a lot of this.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    mariaalice
    Registered Users Posts: 12,365 ✭✭✭✭mariaalice


    The op post is mostly hysterical nonsense.

    Having said that I would be in favour of a ban on the sale of smart phones to children under 10, now that would have little to know effect on seeing something inappropriate as banning something never works. However it would act as signal to the parents and society that having unrestricted access to the internet is not appropriate for children. Also allowing a child unrestricted accesses to the internet should be viewed as child neglect or that that the child is at risk in some way and that the parents needs some sort of support.

    I am aware there are all sorts of contradictions in my proposal.


  • Options
    #13
    whoopsadoodles
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,058 ✭✭✭whoopsadoodles


    rgodard80a wrote: »
    Then just lobby phone providers to provide a parental-lock mobile data plan.
    Restricts dodgy web sites.

    Or there's probably android apps that operate some parental control filtering.

    It's not a difficult problem.
    If the solution came from the top down, from the phone providers who provide the data plan, then it could solve a lot of this.

    Three restrict access to adult sites for pre pay customers.

    http://www.three.ie/explore/about-three/corporate-responsibility/child-safety-and-mobile-phones/


  • Options
    #14
    c68zapdsm5i1ru
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,709 ✭✭✭c68zapdsm5i1ru


    To be honest, if you didn't allow your teenager a smartphone nowadays you would be isolating them quite a bit. A lot of social outings are arranged through snapchat, discussions are held on there etc. and the teenager who doesn't have a smartphone is just excluded.

    I'm not saying that's right, but it's not as simple as just not allowing your kids to have a phone.

    I agree, though, that kids under twelve shouldn't have them.


  • Options
    #15
    Fr_Dougal
    Registered Users Posts: 9,167 ✭✭✭Fr_Dougal


    I’ve seen parents give 2year olds their phone to shut them up, stick on a YouTube cartoon and let them off. Such lazy parenting.


  • Options
    #16
    mariaalice
    Registered Users Posts: 12,365 ✭✭✭✭mariaalice


    Fr_Dougal wrote: »
    I’ve seen parents give 2year olds their phone to shut them up, stick on a YouTube cartoon and let them off. Such lazy parenting.

    That is not the same thing at all.


  • Options
    #17
    whoopsadoodles
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,058 ✭✭✭whoopsadoodles


    Milana Repulsive Pinhead wrote: »
    To be honest, if you didn't allow your teenager a smartphone nowadays you would be isolating them quite a bit. A lot of social outings are arranged through snapchat, discussions are held on there etc. and the teenager who doesn't have a smartphone is just excluded.

    I'm not saying that's right, but it's not as simple as just not allowing your kids to have a phone.

    I agree, though, that kids under twelve shouldn't have them.

    Why twelve specifically out of interest?

    Not that I'm disagreeing, just curious as to why there's a specific age cut off?


  • Options
    #18
    Boom_Bap
    Moderators, Music Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,730 Mod ✭✭✭✭Boom_Bap


    Smart phones and devices are the now and the future, so it's essential for kids to be learning about them.

    What needs to change is the devices themselves, they can be restricted but, they should come with a restriction mode/child mode that is easy to turn on once the device is configured for the first time.
    It's fairly difficult to lock down restrictions, or not very intuitive on the likes of an iPhone/iPad, so parents probably give up at the start of the process.
    Having a simpler model would protect children better.


    Also, the kids need to be watched and properly educated on the dangers as well as the pro's.


  • Options
    #19
    conorhal
    Registered Users Posts: 6,983 ✭✭✭conorhal


    whoopsadoodles wrote: »
    Why twelve specifically out of interest?

    Not that I'm disagreeing, just curious as to why there's a specific age cut off?

    I guess because, before 12 your parents used to organize your social life, after that you tend to organize it yourself. I'd still be pretty antsy about giving teens a phone that wasn't locked down and limited in function though. Something to be treated as a privilage that can be withdrawn.


  • Options
    #20
    iguana
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 12,909 Mod ✭✭✭✭iguana


    Mebuntu wrote: »
    The irresponsibility of parents is staggering and then they moan and blame someone else or some organisation when they discover what their children have been up to or have been groomed.

    If someone ever tries to groom my kid, I'll be blaming the scumbag who tries to groom him over and above anyone else.


  • Options
    #21
    The Backwards Man
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,299 ✭✭✭✭The Backwards Man


    If the kids were worked harder in the fields and the factories and the chimneys during the day then they'd be too tired for messing about on the phone at night. Karl Marx has a lot to answer for.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    c68zapdsm5i1ru
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,709 ✭✭✭c68zapdsm5i1ru


    whoopsadoodles wrote: »
    Why twelve specifically out of interest?

    Not that I'm disagreeing, just curious as to why there's a specific age cut off?

    I suppose I'm thinking of secondary school age, when kids tend to be more likely to be building up a social life, making new friends etc.


  • Options
    #23
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,661 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    Mebuntu wrote: »
    The Ryan Tubridy initiative on this subject is to be welcomed but, unfortunately, this cycle will go on until a law is enacted to make it illegal for a young child to be given a smartphone and that parents will be charged with wilful neglect if they do so.


    I'm wondering what happens to the parents once they are charged with wilful neglect, and what effect do you imagine this will have on their children who will likely be taken into the care of the State in the parents absence?


  • Options
    #24
    iguana
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 12,909 Mod ✭✭✭✭iguana


    Boom_Bap wrote: »
    What needs to change is the devices themselves, they can be restricted but, they should come with a restriction mode/child mode that is easy to turn on once the device is configured for the first time.
    It's fairly difficult to lock down restrictions, or not very intuitive on the likes of an iPhone/iPad, so parents probably give up at the start of the process.
    Having a simpler model would protect children better.

    It might protect some but not others. My son is really into technology and plans to ask Santa for the components to build his own computer. He's really excited about it and is working through the Carol Vorderman Raspberry Pi book in preparation. So I've had to learn about how this is going to happen (because I don't know anything much about software or hardware engineering) and I'm not worried about him accessing anything inappropriate because we'll use the Kano OS which is designed for children. But if he maintains this type of interest in IT I see our trajectory as for the next few years as I'll learn what he wants to know about and help him work it it out. Then a year or so later he'll have caught up to me and we'll be learning together. Not too long after that, he'll move past me and I'll be struggling to keep up. I'll have no luck in restricting his devices as a teen.

    For a lot of us, our kids will pass us out and leave us for dust when it comes to understanding and manipulating the technology itself. So the focus shouldn't be on holding back their usage of commonplace devices. But on teaching them how to handle themselves in the world. In teaching them how indelible their digital footprint will be. How many people there are out there who will use technology to manipulate them or even could just make their lives hell without realising the full consequences of their actions.

    Parents and kids of my generation are lucky. We understand social media far better than most parents did even a decade ago. We know how great it can be and just how bloody negative. So rather than focus on restricting children who will be easily able to develop the skills that most of us will not be able to stay ahead of. We should be focussing on introducing technology and give them the practical and emotional tools to gain the ability to safely navigate the internet in increasing increments of independence.


  • Options
    #25
    Varik
    Registered Users Posts: 12,484 ✭✭✭✭Varik


    Boom_Bap wrote: »
    Smart phones and devices are the now and the future, so it's essential for kids to be learning about them.

    What needs to change is the devices themselves, they can be restricted but, they should come with a restriction mode/child mode that is easy to turn on once the device is configured for the first time.
    It's fairly difficult to lock down restrictions, or not very intuitive on the likes of an iPhone/iPad, so parents probably give up at the start of the process.
    Having a simpler model would protect children better.


    Also, the kids need to be watched and properly educated on the dangers as well as the pro's.

    Won't help, most parents aren't leaving it as it's hard they don't bother phone is just handed over. What your suggesting only help those who actually will try to be a bit proactive.

    Keep hearing of parents complaining when their poor child accidentally spent a fortune on the PlayStation or Xbox, both of which are extremely easy to enable protections but parents don't. Kid gets it and then lies on the registration to be over 18 as being younger automatically enables them, and some point later ask for a parents CC.


  • Options
    #26
    Harry Palmr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 40,061 ✭✭✭✭Harry Palmr


    No child needs a phone in their bag or pocket.


  • Options
    #27
    BrokenArrows
    Registered Users Posts: 7,500 ✭✭✭BrokenArrows


    rgodard80a wrote: »
    Hysterical overreaction...

    Most parents give kids phones for safety.
    So they can ring home if they're in trouble/need anything, and parents can contact them.

    Inappropriate unrestricted social media use is the problem, not smart phones.

    You can give the kid a basic phone with no internet for safety.
    If you give a kid a smart phone then they will be looking at porn in a matter of hours.


  • Options
    #28
    Fann Linn
    Registered Users Posts: 7,772 ✭✭✭Fann Linn


    In my day it was the parents that set the ground rules not the kids.

    How did the change happen?


  • Options
    #29
    Cordell
    Registered Users Posts: 5,786 ✭✭✭Cordell


    Kids need to get used to smartphones, computers and internet to become functioning adults. Those are the tools that are already involved in many aspects of our lives, just like the landline phone and post used to be.

    But the parents need to be aware and responsible. You, as a parent, can't deny them the joy of playing games and using fun apps just to keep them safe - just as you can't keep them indoors to keep them safe. You need to educate them and set the rules, but for this you need to be educated yourself.


  • Options
    #30
    whoopsadoodles
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,058 ✭✭✭whoopsadoodles


    I posted this in another thread. Pretty much sums up my thoughts here.
    whoopsadoodles wrote: »
    Totally agree with this.

    My daughter started out with an itouch with full parental lock down. She could imessage myself and her dad and grandparents at the time. I subsquently moved to android. She got her first smartphone when she was 11 but only because she was going to America on her own so I wanted her to have whatsapp to contact us. She also had a second block phone for emergencies which she carried in her gear bag at all times.

    She has never held much interest in anything tech (aside from Lego mindstorms and her brief fling with coder dojo) and so her phone is usually uncharged or left at home. She is not allowed to take it to bed.

    I monitored her phone for long enough to see that she's as trustworthy as they come and so she was allowed to install Instagram recently.

    I've drilled it into her about internet safety. I've let her watch catfish so she sees the real life effects.

    She now has an iphone. I know all of her pins and passwords, but I don't constantly use them as I want her to know I trust her too. I don't want her to ever hide anything from me, or at least ever feel she needs to. I don't want to totally mollycoddle her and I want her to make good choices for herself, not because she's afraid I'll see.

    I talk to her about bullying and I talk to her about sex. I talk to her constantly so that I know she knows what to do in any situation I can think of. She knows that if she was ever involved in bullying online she would be banned from life. All through talking and explaining. The most important thing I've taught her from day one is em pathy.

    I mentioned earlier she was in America on her own. That was because she's an extremely talented basketball player. She was the youngest on the camp by a couple of years and she returned the following year yet again. She now has an open invitation to go for the entire summer. She plays for a number of teams while also playing hockey and up until very recently was also in the football premier league for her age, only cutting this out to make more time for basketball. Having a phone hasn't restricted any of that. It has however allowed her to arrange to go to the cinema with her friends or invite people to come eat pizza with her. It's also allowed her friend to text and ask "I didn't understand that piece of homework, can you help". And. Yep. She likes to pan out in front of her Nickelodeon shyte when her body is wrecked from all her training but she also eats books and was reading before she began primary school.

    Essentially I'm saying I think totally restricting all tech until 18 is a bad idea. Particularly as in 10 years the world will have moved so so much. There's a balance that should be sought and I think getting that balance wrong can be destructive whichever way you fall.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    BillyBobBS
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,568 ✭✭✭BillyBobBS


    Its actually an epidemic at the moment. I know of one secondary school that had 6 students in one class have left because of social media bullying within their circle of peers.

    My youngest won't be getting one until she is mature enough I'm guessing 15 or 16. The parents who give them to kids below 12 arent fit to have kids.


Advertisement