6 ms·

I completely agree with this! But these aren't my kids, they're other peoples... ;) I can't knowingly allow a child in my care to view sexually explicit images,

by acron0 13y ago

I completely agree with this! But these aren't my kids, they're other peoples... ;) I can't knowingly allow a child in my care to view sexually explicit images, whether I consider it to be healthy or not.

brudgers 13y ago
If you must prevent it, then unplug the house from the internet. That's the way parenting works. If that seems too drastic, then you think about how you might deal with Australian dildo babes in a more reasonable manner. That's also the way parenting works. There's theory and there's reality. In the reality, what matters is what actually benefits a specific living breathing individual child who is experiencing both normal maturation and stressful social/family circumstances. What matters is what really matters. To put it another way, for some kids the only responsible course of action might be cutting the wire. For others, the only responsible course may be buying more bandwidth. Once they're in your home, kids cease being an abstraction. But before going any further, stop and consider that most foster parents and actual parents aren't building the great firewall on their home networks. Instead, they're dealing with it in the great tradition of parenting - by muddling along until a reaction is necessary. Uber parenting requires exerting no more force than necessary.
- Spoom 13y ago
  He mentioned he was a foster parent. He may be legally required to implement a technical block.
  - brudgers 13y ago
    If so, the social worker would have provided resources. Now think about how such a requirement would play out among the pool of foster parents. The image of ordinary people setting up local DNS servers is absurd in a world where the speaker jack has to be color coded. The underlying current feels like a fear of liability. A pity if so.
    - Spoom 13y ago
      Don't get me wrong; I probably won't put any sort of proxy on the network when I have kids, I'll probably just monitor / restrict their use when they're young, and make sure they know what they need to know as they grow up. I was just pointing out that as a foster parent, the children are wards of the state, so precisely what is appropriate or not isn't necessarily up to the foster parent.
      - brudgers 13y ago
        Actually, I think there is a misinterpretation of the foster parent's obligation. It is not to act in the interest of the state. It is to act in the interest of the child. Foster parents are vetted for suitability to act on behalf of the children in their care, not for their ability to carry out directives of the state child welfare apparatus. They are chosen because they will act with reasonable discretion, not bureaucratic zeal. The standard is reasonableness and the metric for reason is the individual child's interest. To put it another way, there are some foster children for whom any internet access may be inappropriate - e.g. a child who might initiate contact with an adult for the purpose of sexual congress. In such cases, even a flip phone might be placed off limits. It's not a series of if thens. Judgment is required.
        shail 13y ago
        Loved your responses.
        acron0 13y ago
        I also loved your responses, but I think they're still wide of the mark and relatively typical from a zealous parent - which is awesome! - with no hands-on experience of actual foster care. The circumstances under which we foster children varies dramatically. In some cases the children have almost-daily communication with their birth parents. Our home, and our embrace, is simply a vessel for them whilst their real home gets back on its feet. There's no animosity or judgement. The kids just need removing from a toxic environment for a length of time, usually under 6 months, so their parents - not them - can rehabilitate, back to the standard required by the local authority. To say "That's the way parenting works" is kind of unfair, because in the example I gave we are not these children's parents and we're not a replacement for them. In fact, the term 'foster parent' is rarely used anymore. A better example would be if my child had a friend over for dinner. I will treat that child with respect and warmth, and whilst they are in my home their safety and well-being are my responsibilities. My child is very 'web savvy', but I have no idea what kinds of influence another child can have, so I need to be cautious. In our reality, not being cautious could lose us a placement; or worse, my wife's career. So yeah, maybe pulling the plug is the best idea in certain situations.

by acron0 13y ago

brudgers 13y ago

If you must prevent it, then unplug the house from the internet. That's the way parenting works. If that seems too drastic, then you think about how you might deal with Australian dildo babes in a more reasonable manner. That's also the way parenting works. There's theory and there's reality. In the reality, what matters is what actually benefits a specific living breathing individual child who is experiencing both normal maturation and stressful social/family circumstances. What matters is what really matters. To put it another way, for some kids the only responsible course of action might be cutting the wire. For others, the only responsible course may be buying more bandwidth. Once they're in your home, kids cease being an abstraction. But before going any further, stop and consider that most foster parents and actual parents aren't building the great firewall on their home networks. Instead, they're dealing with it in the great tradition of parenting - by muddling along until a reaction is necessary. Uber parenting requires exerting no more force than necessary.

Spoom 13y ago
He mentioned he was a foster parent. He may be legally required to implement a technical block.
- brudgers 13y ago
  If so, the social worker would have provided resources. Now think about how such a requirement would play out among the pool of foster parents. The image of ordinary people setting up local DNS servers is absurd in a world where the speaker jack has to be color coded. The underlying current feels like a fear of liability. A pity if so.
  - Spoom 13y ago
    Don't get me wrong; I probably won't put any sort of proxy on the network when I have kids, I'll probably just monitor / restrict their use when they're young, and make sure they know what they need to know as they grow up. I was just pointing out that as a foster parent, the children are wards of the state, so precisely what is appropriate or not isn't necessarily up to the foster parent.
    - brudgers 13y ago
      Actually, I think there is a misinterpretation of the foster parent's obligation. It is not to act in the interest of the state. It is to act in the interest of the child. Foster parents are vetted for suitability to act on behalf of the children in their care, not for their ability to carry out directives of the state child welfare apparatus. They are chosen because they will act with reasonable discretion, not bureaucratic zeal. The standard is reasonableness and the metric for reason is the individual child's interest. To put it another way, there are some foster children for whom any internet access may be inappropriate - e.g. a child who might initiate contact with an adult for the purpose of sexual congress. In such cases, even a flip phone might be placed off limits. It's not a series of if thens. Judgment is required.
      - shail 13y ago
        Loved your responses.
      - acron0 13y ago
        I also loved your responses, but I think they're still wide of the mark and relatively typical from a zealous parent - which is awesome! - with no hands-on experience of actual foster care. The circumstances under which we foster children varies dramatically. In some cases the children have almost-daily communication with their birth parents. Our home, and our embrace, is simply a vessel for them whilst their real home gets back on its feet. There's no animosity or judgement. The kids just need removing from a toxic environment for a length of time, usually under 6 months, so their parents - not them - can rehabilitate, back to the standard required by the local authority. To say "That's the way parenting works" is kind of unfair, because in the example I gave we are not these children's parents and we're not a replacement for them. In fact, the term 'foster parent' is rarely used anymore. A better example would be if my child had a friend over for dinner. I will treat that child with respect and warmth, and whilst they are in my home their safety and well-being are my responsibilities. My child is very 'web savvy', but I have no idea what kinds of influence another child can have, so I need to be cautious. In our reality, not being cautious could lose us a placement; or worse, my wife's career. So yeah, maybe pulling the plug is the best idea in certain situations.