• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Parents encouraging underage drinking

Tony said:
I see nothing wrong with parents allowing their kids to do alcohol or drugs.
Click to expand...

I'm willing to bet that when you are actually a parent, Tony, you will change your stance on this somewhat.
Just a hunch on my part.
 
Your aunt sounds disturbingly like my in-laws. They were parents of 2 young boys back in the 70's/early 80's. They didn't see anything wrong with letting their 12 and 13-year-olds drink and smoke in their house (the smoking was not limited to tobacco, BTW). When they were divorced for the second time (my Mr. was 16), some pretty awful things happened with my mum-in-law and my Mr. I won't go into details on a public forum, but it was bad enough that my mum-in-law will not be having *any* unsupervised visits with any of our children. Ever.

To sum up, I agree with RPG's answer to you - run the hell away from *all* of them. If your cousin needs you, he will find you. Trust in that and get away from the whole situation.

(edited to add) Both my Mr. and my brother-in-law have serious problems with substance abuse. The Mr. is a part of Secular Sobriety, and it's working for him so far - I have no idea what's happening with his brother; as far as I know, he's still drinking and using.
 
I'm sorry to hear all that Peach Jr. I'm glad your Mr. has someone as wonderful and supportive as you in his life.

This is a case in point scenario about letting kids smoke and drink being child abuse. They have problems with substance abuse now. That is no way to set up a child for a happy productive adult life.
 
Are you sure he isn't still a child :D ;) :p
Hey, if you can call me an idiot Tony, I can call you immature.
 
Eos of the Eons said:

Hey, if you can call me an idiot Tony, I can call you immature.
Click to expand...


And if you can call me immature, I can call you a poo poo head. :p
 
I believe Tony is right.

Child is used until puberty. Then a person is called an adolescent or youth until they reach maturity.

If anyone had called me a child at age 15, I certainly would have taken offense.

If a parent allows their son or daughter to have a glass of wine with their meal, are they committing child abuse?
 
BobK said:
I believe Tony is right.

Child is used until puberty. Then a person is called an adolescent or youth until they reach maturity.

If anyone had called me a child at age 15, I certainly would have taken offense.

If a parent allows their son or daughter to have a glass of wine with their meal, are they committing child abuse?
Click to expand...
Thats not tonys position...
He said...
"I see nothing wrong with parents allowing their kids to do alcohol or drugs"
I put it to you that the "glass of wine with thier meal" line is a strawman, I was discussing the statement "allowing your kids to do alcohol or drugs" which is child abuse, according to me and according to the law... Unless, of course, we assume he was actually talking about juvenile goats?

You can invent all the sub category names you like...adolescent,infant,toddler....In My country you are a child until you are 18...is it different in your country? If you are not yet an adult, what are you? Do you have pre and post puberty laws or pre and post adulthood laws?
 
Fool,

Actually my post was mostly in reference to your statement...
Sorry Tony, no matter how tough/cool/smart you thought you were, you were a child.
Click to expand...

Your adamant statement applies to one definition of child but a more common definition is "a young person especially between infancy and youth". By disallowing Tony's statement of 15 not being a child you are stating as fact that Tony's definition is not valid. Mr. Webster would disagree with you.

You may be legally correct, I don't know, but your made no mention of using the term in a strictly legal sense. That being the case, it seems to me that Tony's use of the more common definition was perfectly valid.

The wine question was simply an afterthought.

As to pre and post adulthood laws, yes we do have them.
Special rules for minors don'tcha know.
Doesn't Australia do the same?

You seem to be using the age of 18 to define the end of child abuse.
I guess I must be a child abuser. Funny, I don't feel like one.
I think my children were early teens when I first gave them a beer.
Both my boys turned out very well, thank you.
Neither one has become an alchohol abuser and in fact drink only occasionally and not to excess.
 
BobK said:
Fool,

Actually my post was mostly in reference to your statement...

Your adamant statement applies to one definition of child but a more common definition is "a young person especially between infancy and youth". By disallowing Tony's statement of 15 not being a child you are stating as fact that Tony's definition is not valid. Mr. Webster would disagree with you.

You may be legally correct, I don't know, but your made no mention of using the term in a strictly legal sense. That being the case, it seems to me that Tony's use of the more common definition was perfectly valid.

The wine question was simply an afterthought.

As to pre and post adulthood laws, yes we do have them.
Special rules for minors don'tcha know.
Doesn't Australia do the same?

You seem to be using the age of 18 to define the end of child abuse.
I guess I must be a child abuser. Funny, I don't feel like one.
I think my children were early teens when I first gave them a beer.
Both my boys turned out very well, thank you.
Neither one has become an alchohol abuser and in fact drink only occasionally and not to excess.
Click to expand...

Bob.
Tony is a troll. He uses statements like "I see nothing wrong with parents allowing their kids to do alcohol or drugs." Because it is an inflamitory statement that he can then backslide on. If he meant "I see no great harm in allowing a child to have some wine with a meal" he would have said that. If challenged he will normally backslide on his statements saying that word X does not mean what people commonly believe word X to mean.... ie "kid" does not mean child..."doing alcohol and drugs" does not mean becoming intoxicated it means a sip of wine...what bullsh*t.
 
You seem to be using the age of 18 to define the end of child abuse.
I guess I must be a child abuser. Funny, I don't feel like one.
I think my children were early teens when I first gave them a beer.
Both my boys turned out very well, thank you.
Neither one has become an alchohol abuser and in fact drink only occasionally and not to excess.
Click to expand...

I would only call it abuse when they are encouraged to drink until they are drunk several times a month. Otherwise, alcoholic adults don't make good parents on top of that.

A drink of wine at the dinner table is responsible enough, especially if it's only on special occasions. My brother wouldn't touch wine though, thought it was gross. Must have been a dry wine. I got into vodka coolers when I was 16, and away from adult supervision. Noone ever drank in my house. I hardly ever drink now. Maybe 3 times a year.
 
Fool,

I'm not very familiar with Tony's posts, so I'll bow to your judgement in the matter.

Hope there are no ill feelings about my butting in.
 
BobK said:
Fool,

I'm not very familiar with Tony's posts, so I'll bow to your judgement in the matter.

Hope there are no ill feelings about my butting in.
Click to expand...

Absolutely not Bob.... I do take your point about introducing children to the social consumption of alcohol.

Alcoholism is a huge problem in parts of Australian society, It destroys whole communities. Alcoholic parents stand very little chance of preventing thier children from going down the same path. It is the responsibility of parents to most definitely see something wrong in thier children "doing alcohol and drugs" and I see modelling responsible consumption as a very important part.

Ever seen a rotten drunk parent telling a child off for being drunk too? Its both sad and funny at the same time.....
 
Re: Re: Parents encouraging underage drinking

Yahweh said:

Drinking is a big "No-no". The reason why drinking crosses the line and cigarettes dont is the fact drinking can make you drunk. Cigarettes wont impair your judgement, impair your driving, make you surly, alter your personality, hurt your liver, or kill your brain.
Click to expand...

On the other hand, there is a "safe" level of alcohol intake at which you are unlikely to do long term damage to your health. This is not the case for smoking. Smoking will impair your driving (if you combine the two activities, same as if you combine alcohol and driving), alter your personality (effect of nicotine), hurt your lungs (cancer) and in a large percentage of cases, result in your early death.

The US attitude to alcohol has always seem strange to me, from the history of prohibition to the unusually high (compared with other countries) legal drinking age in some states. Anyone got a theory as to what makes alcohol such an issue in the US?
 
I think it has something to do with the deaths caused by drunk drivers. The older a person is, it is thought the more responsible they will be and not drive drunk or drink too much as much.


Also, fetal alcohol syndrome is heart wrenching. A normal healthy bit of human life destroyed before they ever had the chance to experience life.

There are tragedies related to alcohol.

Any other theories?
 
Drunk people do a lot of damage. They urinate in public, destroy road signs, get into fights, kill people when they drive, and become abusive.

With impaired judgement, a lot of damage can be done. For the most part a cigarette only does damage to the people smoking and those they are with.

Alcohol is a major cause of sick days in the workforce due to hangovers. Alcohol has the potential to ruin a life in a matter of hours or even minutes as opposed to the matter of years that smoking takes.

P.S. I am completely against smoking as well.

Edited to correct : Actually stress is the number one cause of sick days. No specific figures, but a quick search on Google brings up a few sources that claim hangovers are a pretty big problem. This is completely anecdotal, however.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom