4 ms·

I presume you’ve not raised kids of your own. If you had, you’d know that constant monitoring of older children is both infeasible and unhealthy. Children don’t

I presume you’ve not raised kids of your own. If you had, you’d know that constant monitoring of older children is both infeasible and unhealthy. Children don’t magically become responsible at age 16 or 18; they get there by participating in the world in age-appropriate ways. That includes the Internet. It’s true that the Internet has dark places, but it also has wonderful places that are good for children to socialize and learn. It’s the job of parents to guide children to use the Internet responsibly. This isn’t easy, and tragedies will occur. That’s true for all aspects of life.

silisili 4y ago
A couple thoughts. I generally agree with your post, except maybe a couple implications... 1 - Children under 13 are way, way different than a 16 year old. They both do 'stupid' things, of course. Middle school age children are probably most susceptible to about everything. 2 - Kids don't need the internet to become responsible adults. We have thousands of years of examples proving as much. I think it is perfectly reasonable to raise kids with heavily restricted internet, or no internet at all if the parents so choose.
- Dracophoenix 4y ago
  > 1 - Children under 13 are way, way different than a 16 year old. They both do 'stupid' things, of course. Middle school age children are probably most susceptible to about everything. "Stupidity" is, in most cases, inexperience. By withholding their ability to experience the Internet until their teens, your children be worse off than less intelligent teens with years more experience in navigating the web. They'll likely ending up repeating the same mistakes at 13 that they're cohorts learned from at 5. All you're doing is delaying the inevitable. > 2 - Kids don't need the internet to become responsible adults. We have thousands of years of examples proving as much. I think it is perfectly reasonable to raise kids with heavily restricted internet, or no internet at all if the parents so choose. That's become less true as more institutions and information sources move online. Sure, parents have the right to heavily restrict what information their kids learn in their homes. That's what the religiously fanatical do when they homeschool their kids. But the outcome of that is often one where children lack the ability to be self-sufficient adults at the appropriate age. Hiding what people on the Internet do or say won't save your kids, only stifle them.
  - jmathai 4y ago
    Every parent will have different philosophies and every child matures at different rates. That being said, we have continued to push back the age when our kids have an internet connected device of their own (oldest is a 7th grade / 12yo boy). Went with an Apple Watch with cellular so my son could text his friends and listen to music. Neither him or his 2 year younger sister can be on a laptop in private. I use NextDNS to block a bunch of sites. They don’t have any social media accounts. This sounds draconian. But the stuff kids can stumble upon online is terrible and I don’t buy into the idea that they’ll learn through experience. I think many people don’t realize how under developed a child’s brain is.
    - Dracophoenix 4y ago
      > Every parent will have different philosophies and every child matures at different rates. While I agree that every child matures at different rates, "maturity" as a term is a weasel word that says more about a parent's beliefs and expectations than any objective evaluation of a person's psychological state. Parental philosophy and biological maturity are orthogonal at best. Every parental system makes certain assumptions that turn out to be untrue/self-contradictory or become outmoded as the child grows up. People learn things in spite of their parents, not because of them. The only successful parental philosophies are the ones the allow the child to grow into himself while giving him a clear view of the world as it is. > That being said, we have continued to push back the age when our kids have an internet connected device of their own (oldest is a 7th grade / 12yo boy). Went with an Apple Watch with cellular so my son could text his friends and listen to music. Neither him or his 2 year younger sister can be on a laptop in private. I use NextDNS to block a bunch of sites. They don’t have any social media accounts. Oddly enough, the inverse occurred in my case. My parents more or less policed the music I listened to until I was about ten (that wasn't hard to do when music came on CDs). They also wouldn't let me have a feature phone until I was your son's age, but I already had my own laptop by then, albeit one only permitted for use on weekends. I probably learned more about the world from all the time I've spent in front of a screen than I have from my parents or anyone else. While I personally didn't have a Facebook account when that was all the rage, that was a decision I made for myself. Given that your son is almost a teen,your son's friends are likely on some form of social media and he's probably miss out on socializing with them beyond texting and calling. That is unless he's more of a loner like I was at that age. > This sounds draconian. But the stuff kids can stumble upon online is terrible and I don’t buy into the idea that they’ll learn through experience. How and when did you learn to operate a computer yourself? How did you make your way to this forum? Your kids can stumble upon a dead body in the real world. The internet is no more and no less gruesome than the events that occur in the real world. > I think many people don’t realize how under developed a child’s brain is. If a child's mind is developed enough to understand actions, consequences, and responsibilities, they have the ability to understand how to use a computer. Eventually, they're going to look up stuff you don't like. Even Wikipedia will provide explicit pictures of sexual acts if you type in words like "fellatio".
brianwawok 4y ago
In fact I have raised kids of 18, 6, 2, and 1. THe internet is not appropiate for children. Full stop.

silisili 4y ago

A couple thoughts. I generally agree with your post, except maybe a couple implications... 1 - Children under 13 are way, way different than a 16 year old. They both do 'stupid' things, of course. Middle school age children are probably most susceptible to about everything. 2 - Kids don't need the internet to become responsible adults. We have thousands of years of examples proving as much. I think it is perfectly reasonable to raise kids with heavily restricted internet, or no internet at all if the parents so choose.

Dracophoenix 4y ago
> 1 - Children under 13 are way, way different than a 16 year old. They both do 'stupid' things, of course. Middle school age children are probably most susceptible to about everything. "Stupidity" is, in most cases, inexperience. By withholding their ability to experience the Internet until their teens, your children be worse off than less intelligent teens with years more experience in navigating the web. They'll likely ending up repeating the same mistakes at 13 that they're cohorts learned from at 5. All you're doing is delaying the inevitable. > 2 - Kids don't need the internet to become responsible adults. We have thousands of years of examples proving as much. I think it is perfectly reasonable to raise kids with heavily restricted internet, or no internet at all if the parents so choose. That's become less true as more institutions and information sources move online. Sure, parents have the right to heavily restrict what information their kids learn in their homes. That's what the religiously fanatical do when they homeschool their kids. But the outcome of that is often one where children lack the ability to be self-sufficient adults at the appropriate age. Hiding what people on the Internet do or say won't save your kids, only stifle them.
- jmathai 4y ago
  Every parent will have different philosophies and every child matures at different rates. That being said, we have continued to push back the age when our kids have an internet connected device of their own (oldest is a 7th grade / 12yo boy). Went with an Apple Watch with cellular so my son could text his friends and listen to music. Neither him or his 2 year younger sister can be on a laptop in private. I use NextDNS to block a bunch of sites. They don’t have any social media accounts. This sounds draconian. But the stuff kids can stumble upon online is terrible and I don’t buy into the idea that they’ll learn through experience. I think many people don’t realize how under developed a child’s brain is.
  - Dracophoenix 4y ago
    > Every parent will have different philosophies and every child matures at different rates. While I agree that every child matures at different rates, "maturity" as a term is a weasel word that says more about a parent's beliefs and expectations than any objective evaluation of a person's psychological state. Parental philosophy and biological maturity are orthogonal at best. Every parental system makes certain assumptions that turn out to be untrue/self-contradictory or become outmoded as the child grows up. People learn things in spite of their parents, not because of them. The only successful parental philosophies are the ones the allow the child to grow into himself while giving him a clear view of the world as it is. > That being said, we have continued to push back the age when our kids have an internet connected device of their own (oldest is a 7th grade / 12yo boy). Went with an Apple Watch with cellular so my son could text his friends and listen to music. Neither him or his 2 year younger sister can be on a laptop in private. I use NextDNS to block a bunch of sites. They don’t have any social media accounts. Oddly enough, the inverse occurred in my case. My parents more or less policed the music I listened to until I was about ten (that wasn't hard to do when music came on CDs). They also wouldn't let me have a feature phone until I was your son's age, but I already had my own laptop by then, albeit one only permitted for use on weekends. I probably learned more about the world from all the time I've spent in front of a screen than I have from my parents or anyone else. While I personally didn't have a Facebook account when that was all the rage, that was a decision I made for myself. Given that your son is almost a teen,your son's friends are likely on some form of social media and he's probably miss out on socializing with them beyond texting and calling. That is unless he's more of a loner like I was at that age. > This sounds draconian. But the stuff kids can stumble upon online is terrible and I don’t buy into the idea that they’ll learn through experience. How and when did you learn to operate a computer yourself? How did you make your way to this forum? Your kids can stumble upon a dead body in the real world. The internet is no more and no less gruesome than the events that occur in the real world. > I think many people don’t realize how under developed a child’s brain is. If a child's mind is developed enough to understand actions, consequences, and responsibilities, they have the ability to understand how to use a computer. Eventually, they're going to look up stuff you don't like. Even Wikipedia will provide explicit pictures of sexual acts if you type in words like "fellatio".

brianwawok 4y ago

In fact I have raised kids of 18, 6, 2, and 1. THe internet is not appropiate for children. Full stop.