How could you not WANT to take responsibility? They're YOUR KIDS!? I'm guessing the 60%+ of parents that voted no was because they KNOW they're a crappy parent and would look to video games, TV shows and other social media to blame their kids behaviors on, right? Of course! They're too busy working, on their electronic devices, fighting with their spouse or worrying about something other than their children. I mean, what the hell is Spongebob for anyway!? Other than to babysit! Or, lets give them a hand held device, tablet, iphone, i-something, to keep them quite, preoccupied, and to transform them into evil little monsters that later go into OUR children's schools with guns! What a bunch of arrogant people!
If the 60%+ people that voted no on this website were better parents, we wouldn't even be on this website taking this poll! Get offline and go deal with your kids!
my father did not support me while i grew up and i really wish he had but i had to struggle and put my best foot forward throughout my life. i now know that he was not able to support me and my brother because he had financial issues but i guess if he wanted to decieve my mother then thats how he wants to be.
The parents are the main people that are influencing their children so I say yes they should be morally and legally responsible for the actions of their children; but up to a certain limit. The child is taught how to act in public situations by their parents. But I think there is a certain point where the influence of peers is greater than a parent's influence.
I do believe that a parent should be held responsible for their child actions. A child is basically the reflection of their parents. I feel if a child is taught discipline and moral values that a child is less likely to create problems. Those children who do not receive those lessons early in life will less likely follow the rules.
Parents have a great influence on the child...Parents teaches their childrens, right from their chidhood. It depends on the parents that how they treat their childrens, If a parent doesnt take care of their child then he will not gain good values by them. And this will affect the child's future
What about a situation where a Parent directly instructs the child to do something wrong? The child is then under parental influences and if that child is under 12 years old, the child shouldn't be assumed to have fully understood or consented to what they were doing. Sometimes a parent will tell their 8 year old to do something wrong, should the child be considered to have voluntarily consented?
People who voted yes on this poll obviously have no understanding of their effect on their children. Parents are the only direct source of how their children's behavior is formed. Period. So they are accountable. I wish there is a law to regulate this matter so people become more aware of their impact - especially those who are dysfunctional.
Responsible because they are the main influence for their children. It is often said that parents are their kids first teacher. What parents teaches is actually done by the children when they are exposed to the social environment. But after some age it is for the parents to have close view on their kids on what type of peers they have,etc
I am flabbergasted by the number of parents I know, good honest people, that don't monitor nor strongly influence their children's behavior, activities, and communications. If more people took an active interest in their children's lives there would be less ADHD, fewer teen pregnancies, fewer suicides, less violence, and less bullying. Are people just lazy? Too consumed with themselves? Why have kids if you weren't planning on raising them???
This is because parents are their role models, children follow directly what their father and mother do. Hence, this is very vital for parents to show their good behaviour to others so that their children will follow them. In addition, parents are the closest person to their children, only parents are able to change their children, so parents should be held morally and legally responsible for the actions of their children.
If a child of yours were to steal something such as a diamond ring, which would be considered theft, or robbery. Now they get caught, as a parent are you responsible for them stealing a ring while they did on their very own free will? Personally I would think this would make a parent angry and disappointed at their child, however most parents will comprehend that in the end, it was their child’s decision to steal that ring.
Most parents raise their children the best that they can. You can teach a child right and wrong, and you can give punishments where you see fit. However, when a child grows up and starts to spread his/her wings, their choices are no longer entirely in control of a parent. You can do the best you can do as a parent, but when the time comes to let go, a parent loses some control.
Children should learn to be held accountable for their own actions, and cannot do so if they constantly have a parent there to bail them out. Most of us grow up learning that if things get tough, mom and dad will find a way to bail you out, taking all the pressure off ourselves. This can be truly dangerous, and as a result children can easily become dependent.
the parents should not be held legally responsible for their children's actions because if they always take their responsible for their children's, how can they eligible. They will no have confident by themselves. They could not be reach their goals. If the children were always under control of their parents, the children's can not be stand by themselves. So the parents should not be held their children's legally.
They need to educate their kids to make good choices surely, but you can't be with them every moment of every day to ensure they do. Some of it is just out of your hands. You can only do so much and past that they have to be held responsible for themselves. So no I don't think a parent should held morally and legally responsible for what their child does, as they can't control everything.
No, parents should not be held morally and legally responsible for the actions of their children because parents can provide stable, loving homes and still have a child get in trouble. Some children are more headstrong than others and as they become teenagers parents have very little true control over their actions. When a teenager makes a conscious decision to do wrong, he does it knowingly and his parents should not be punished for the teenager's decision.
Its the childs decision to commit a crime or offense. While the parent did raise him or her, it is ultimately their decision. If children learn that their parents will be held responsible for what happened, then they will be much more likely to commit another offense in the future.
Children need to learn to take responsibility from their actions. If the parent takes the consequences, the child learned nothing from their mistake and then in turn will continue to make bad mistakes. A parent can lead a child "to water" but can't make them "drink" so to speak. A parent builds most of the groundwork; however 12-17 year old minors have full control over their actions.
I say no because some parents put their all into teaching their children right from wrong, but some children are still going to do what they want. No parent should have to pay for something that a kid that knows its wrong and still does it anyway. They need to take responsibility for any wrong they may do.
I'm torn on the argument I feel parents should be responsible for their child's action but at the same time they should not. At a young age a child is influenced by there surrounding and they tend to follow there parents action, so for example if a parent smokes around there child there child might smoke to, but there other things that influences children that parents cant control.