3 ms·
> This used to be considered common sense but not anymore. Good! Some progress at least.
by balfirevic 7y ago
> This used to be considered common sense but not anymore.
Good! Some progress at least.
- mytailorisrich 7y agoChildren cannot reasonably consent to most things concerning them. Ignoring reality for the sake of ideology isn't progress. By that logic, next a doctor will refuse to vaccinate an 8 year old because the child refused to give consent.
- balfirevic 7y agoNo, you misunderstand what the logic here is. Parents should be able to consent to some things in the name of their children and absolutely should not be able to do it for other things (even those things their children would be able to consent to were they grown ups, so I don't mean illegal things). Exactly what stuff the parents can consent to is the real question and should be argued properly and not treated as any kind of "common sense". Things that are necessary for the safety of the children - like vaccines - yes. Other things are on much more shaky grounds.
- mytailorisrich 7y agoI perfectly understand the logic. Data processing is ubiquitous these days and control and consent falls well within what parents are there for. That is common sense: parents are there to make decisions on behalf of their children on issues children cannot handle.
- balfirevic 7y ago> That is common sense. Well (as you said - and thankfully) not any more.
- mytailorisrich 7y agoThe law will hopefully be changed because it isn't neither workable nor sensible if parents cannot consent on behalf of their children.
- lrem 7y agoMy babies usually refused to give consent for changing nappies...