Dear Steve

If I may enter the fray, regarding this rather familiar ground, I see the
critical perspective you are offering, but would be very interested to hear
how it works as a positive assertion. In other words, how would you define
the responsibilities (and rights of parents) for their children, and how
would you specify this differently for infants, children and adolescents of
different ages?

Cheers, Sonia

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Rennie, Steve            [HES] [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent:	29 October 1999 13:12
> To:	[log in to unmask]
> Subject:	RE: INCORE ~ Protecting Children Online
> 
> Yes David, children face many restrictions as to what they can see or
> experience. Many of these are matters covered by statute, others are
> imposed by the desires and wishes of their carers. A good deal of  time
> and effort in adolescence is spent circumventing the restrictions,
> apparently with high levels of success if the incidence of under-age
> drinking is taken as a measure.
> 
> I have no great problem with many of these restrictions and only slight
> qualms about most others. I do think though that time and effort spent
> increasing them is rather a waste of resources. In particular, attempts to
> automate the restrictions, to impose parental restrictions even when the
> parent is not present, is  something of a civil liberties issue. It is
> also, if the V chip experience is anything to go by, likely to be entirely
> ineffective.
> 
> I do not agree that it is beneficial for either party to transfer to
> parents those aspects of the general duty of care in this area, currently
> held by the state. Children are citizens too (or subjects in the case of
> the UK). They are not livestock. They have rights as people quite distinct
> from those of their parents. I am appalled  for example that one of our
> responses to the need for multi-cultural approaches in education gives
> parents the right to take children out of religious observance  sessions
> in schools, but does not give children the right to take that decision (or
> reverse that decision) for themselves.
> 
> Stephen Rennie, Leeds Metropolitan University
> [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> 


%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%