M
Mike_25
Guest
Minors be gambling where they ain't supposed to and that always lead to questions of who's really at fault here. Is it on the parents for not watching close enough? Or the kid themselves for sneaking and lying their way onto these sites? Truth is, it's complicated.
On the one hand, you could argue parents should take some heat:
•They're legally responsible for what their kids do, period. If a minor's gambling illegally, the parents failed in their duty to parent. Some blame could be placed.
•They pay for the wi-fi, devices and funds that enable the gambling. Indirectly enabling it through the means. Could see them as complicit to an extent.
•Threatening parents with lawsuits and charges could motivate them to be more on top of online activity and prevent underage gambling access. Promotes good parenting, you feel?
On the other hand, that ain't always fair either:
•Parents can't really monitor everything their kids do online or stop determined teens from scheming behind their backs. Underage gambling is often deliberately hidden.
•It's unreasonable to punish parents for the bad choices their kids make, especially as they gain more independence. At a certain point, kids become responsible for themselves.
•Blaming parents just causes stress, anxiety, guilt and damage to relationships over things largely out of their control. Not all underage betting is due to negligence.
•Courts recognize parents can't completely control teens and can't be liable for all their illegal doings. Responsibility's on the minor, not the parents at the end of the day.
•There are limits to parental control, especially over older kids and teens. At a certain point, the minor becomes responsible for their own actions and choices.
In the end, while parents should promote good values and monitor tech use, they can't and shouldn't be punished just because their kid bets where they shouldn't. Nuance matters here - details of each situation are key. But generally speaking, the minor themselves needs to take the heat for unauthorized gambling, not the parents. Parents provide means but minors make their own bad choices. Reasonable rules and consequences from parents, sure, but legal punishment of parents is unreasonable. Both sides have arguments here, so people differ on where the line's really drawn between parental responsibility and minors' accountability for their actions.
The bottom line: parents should set rules and values, monitor as able, but can't and shouldn't be legally punished simply due to the deceitful actions of their kids. Minors need to face consequences for their own illegal gambling, not blame their parents. A complex issue with many factors involved, but that's my take! Responsibility lies with the minor gamblers themselves, not necessarily the parents who did what they could to raise them well.
On the one hand, you could argue parents should take some heat:
•They're legally responsible for what their kids do, period. If a minor's gambling illegally, the parents failed in their duty to parent. Some blame could be placed.
•They pay for the wi-fi, devices and funds that enable the gambling. Indirectly enabling it through the means. Could see them as complicit to an extent.
•Threatening parents with lawsuits and charges could motivate them to be more on top of online activity and prevent underage gambling access. Promotes good parenting, you feel?
On the other hand, that ain't always fair either:
•Parents can't really monitor everything their kids do online or stop determined teens from scheming behind their backs. Underage gambling is often deliberately hidden.
•It's unreasonable to punish parents for the bad choices their kids make, especially as they gain more independence. At a certain point, kids become responsible for themselves.
•Blaming parents just causes stress, anxiety, guilt and damage to relationships over things largely out of their control. Not all underage betting is due to negligence.
•Courts recognize parents can't completely control teens and can't be liable for all their illegal doings. Responsibility's on the minor, not the parents at the end of the day.
•There are limits to parental control, especially over older kids and teens. At a certain point, the minor becomes responsible for their own actions and choices.
In the end, while parents should promote good values and monitor tech use, they can't and shouldn't be punished just because their kid bets where they shouldn't. Nuance matters here - details of each situation are key. But generally speaking, the minor themselves needs to take the heat for unauthorized gambling, not the parents. Parents provide means but minors make their own bad choices. Reasonable rules and consequences from parents, sure, but legal punishment of parents is unreasonable. Both sides have arguments here, so people differ on where the line's really drawn between parental responsibility and minors' accountability for their actions.
The bottom line: parents should set rules and values, monitor as able, but can't and shouldn't be legally punished simply due to the deceitful actions of their kids. Minors need to face consequences for their own illegal gambling, not blame their parents. A complex issue with many factors involved, but that's my take! Responsibility lies with the minor gamblers themselves, not necessarily the parents who did what they could to raise them well.
