Should parents read kids' text messages?

Saying this makes me feel old, but it's relevant, so I'll chance it.   My parents had it so much easier.  I had basically three ways to communicate with my friends: talking in person, writing a note or letter, or talking on the phone.  There was only one phone in the house, which was attached to the wall on a limited cord, so privacy was at a minimum.  Still, I often found the need to climb into the hall closet to talk to my friends.  

Our kids have a host of ways to foster private communication.  First it was AIM, then MySpace, now texting.  All great ways to communicate, but equally dangerous.  The question is: how much privacy is too much?   With all the publicity about "sexting", should we be monitoring our kids' text messages?  Is there even a right answer?

For parents, it's a matter of privacy vs. safety.  Teens generally view it as a matter of control and/or lack of trust.  

Let's talk about it.  Parents, do you think it's OK to sneak a peek at your child's text messages? Kids, what do you say?  

Hazing in high school

Most of us have heard stories of hazing in college, particularly in fraternities and sororities, but you may be unaware of similar occurrences in high school. A recent study showed nearly half of all high school students have been hazed, and that number is similar to the last study done in 2000.  

Any time teen life is portrayed in the media, whether in a movie or a study such as this, it's interesting to hear perspectives from teens themselves.  The hazing reported included anything from silly stunts to drinking games, leaving the interpretation of the word "hazing" wide open. I'd be curious to hear interpretations of the data from teens out there:  are the statistics realistic or overblown?    

Parents, this is a great conversation starter.  Ask your teens what they think about the numbers, and ask if they have ever been part of a hazing incident (on either the giving or receiving end). 

USA Today article:  Nearly half of high schoolers have been hazed 

Morning after pill approved for 17-year-olds

"I, even I, am the Lord, and apart from me there is no savior."  Isaiah 43:11

When, oh when, will America learn?  Shouldn't it be obvious? We have the highest teen pregnancy rate among the most developed countries in the world, so handing yet another form of birth control to our kids is ludicrous.  And yet, the FDA has now made the "morning after" contraceptive available to 17-year-olds without a prescription.  What just happened here?  

The president of Planned Parenthood called the decision "commonsense policy." Commonsense?  Is anyone really believing that?  Never mind the moral implications here.  I don't need to tread that road with all of you.  We know better.  

Why just 17-year-olds?  Does the FDA care about our 17-year-olds?  Unlikely.  Do they care about the pharmaceutical industry?  More than our kids, most certainly.  The saddest part of all is the message it sends to our girls.  In essence, they are being told, "You are God over your body and your life."  

One has to wonder what would happen if the government went after the numerous industries that are sexualizing our girls at such a young age, in particular the media.  Not likely to happen though, is it?  The media would hate to report on the horrors of...the media.  :)

Moms, Dads, hang in there.  Keep fighting those messages your daughters are bombarded with every day. Keep reminding them, He is the Lord, and apart from Him there is no savior.  Not a pill, not a boy, not the government.  

Praying for you and your children,

Lisa 

  

Parental Rights Under Attack

I was first alerted to this issue by an email from a friend.  Upon further study, I was surprised to find it continues to fly under the radar of even the Christian media.  

The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) is a treaty which is being considered for ratification by the United States.  Under the terms of this treaty, parental rights would be replaced by "the best interests of the child" as defined by an international committee of 18 people in Switzerland.  

According to the ParentalRights.org website, government agencies would have the power to override your parental choices at their whim because they determine what is in "the best interest of the child."   

For example, if your child complains to his school counselor that you make him go to church against his will, a case could be made against you claiming that church is not in the child's best interest.  "This means that the burden of proof falls on the parent to prove to the State that they are good parents - when it should fall upon the State to prove that their investigation is not without cause."  (ParentalRights.org)

Judges across the United States are already denying parental rights.  Others refuse to recognize them because they are not explicitly protection in the United States Constitution.  ParentalRights. org seeks to add a constitutional amendment that "will ensure that the rights of parents to raise their children are honored by federal court judges and recognized above international law."  

I strongly advise you to become educated on this important issue and inform your elected representatives of your position.   

For more information, visit www.parentalrights.org.