Why do parents use age against minors?
I've always noticed that parents seem to all agree that every age below 18 is "too young" for whatever situation. At 17, most parents find that their kids are still "too young" to be out past a certain curfew. But then, suddenly on their 17 year olds' 18th birthday, when freedom is legally given to their child, the kid is now able to do whatever they want.
I've always believed that this is absolutely horrible. Think about this, if your child has not been given freedom, and now suddenly is able to do whatever they want, couldn't they do those things that they were never originally allowed to do and then ruin their life? Shouldn't parents feel good that they can trust their child after they become an adult?
I guess my question is this: Do you believe that minors (by this i mean high school aged kids ranging from 14-18) should be given more freedom? Why or why not?
Comments
The problem is you are liable for what your kid does, but sometimes your kid follows the ideas of another kid who cannot be trusted. Or gets into situations they cannot handle, so you restrict your child's exposure to situations where you do not have influence.
There are really good kids that if it was just them would not cause any problem at all, but the more kids there are, the lower the quality of judgement.
Just like driving, you not only have to worry about your own driving, you have to worry about the other drivers.
Unfortunately those in small groups are targeted, so what is your answer other than to be parentnoid?
I agree with you