What if children could sue their parents for negligence and malpractice?

It would have at least one huge benefit, it would make people more responsible about having children.

When my parents had me they were dirt poor with no good reason to believe they would ever come out of that situation. Was it negligent for them to have a child in that situation? Absolutely. Was it wrong to bring another person into that situation? Absolutely.

I was lucky that through blood, sweat, and tears my parents were able to pull themselves out of their situation. By my first memories (at around five years old), we had a middle class family. But, that was extremely lucky. When I was born, my parent's couldn't have predicted that they would be so fortunate five years later.

I suspect I'm going to get attacked in this thread for proposing this radical idea. People always get so idealistic about having children. However, idealism doesn't keep negligence from being negligence. I can hear the manglers of definitions of words already but we have a simple fact:

negligence

[MASS NOUN]
1Failure to take proper care over something:
his injury was due to the negligence of his employers
MORE EXAMPLE SENTENCES
SYNONYMS
1.1 Law Breach of a duty of care which results in damage.
www.oxforddictionaries.com...

We all know that negligence is rampant among parents. I think it's obvious that my proposal would help to improve that. Why be against it then?

Then there's the issue of "malpractice" among parents. My proposal would give a whole new meaning to the term "family court."

a reply to: Profusion

That's kind of the purpose of social workers and your locale's child protective services division. Since children cannot do these things on their own, it's up to them to intervene and begin proceedings.

So your parents were negligent and ideally you should have never been born?

Are you going to sue your parents for their negligence?

Anyone who has a child who is poor is negligent?

Did you think this through before you posted it?

Simple answer... when I was a kid (and teenager) I thought my parents were out of their minds, overbearing, obnoxious, harsh and brutal and I would do what I could to get back at them. Now I am older and understand every bit of what they did... and I wouldn't change a thing. They were right and I was wrong. Teen angst is no substitute for knowledge.

There are plenty of kids that would just say their parents are "negligent" without even realizing the consequence. That the problem with youth, the idea of long term consequences cannot be grasped.

Who defines the negligence? Isn't there already many agencies, laws and people who do this?

Adults shape young people, they destroy their idiocy.
To a moron, sorry, a teenager, idiocy is this deep metaphysical, mystical internet thing they use to prove themselves right all day long - no bias, honest. . . .

Their patience is angst, their problem solving is usually aggression, sometimes passive. Their deep thoughts are other people's words and actions.

To answer simply, No, children should not be allowed to sue their parents unless it can be proven by someone responsible that abuse took place. Hell I'm sure if you took a child's pocket money they'd sue you for economic terrorism. They'd probably win too as the judge would only be 16 having sued the Queen for abuse of his right to be a judge. It's a deep hole that one.....

a reply to: Profusion

Then it would be fair that the parents should be able to counter-sue.

This sounds like a clever way of funding money into lawyers pockets.

a reply to: Profusion

Is that so that the children can go out and buy better parents with the money?

Perhaps parents who had an unplanned pregnancy and decided to keep the child should sue their children for the financial losses that ensue?

I grew up poor and it's made me see life in a humbled light. My parents were by no means perfect, but I'm grateful to be alive and thank God all the time.
If children today, could sue their parents for what they think of as mistreatment or what not, there would be alot of backed up courts with stupid allegations by a bunch of brats. I'm just saying... these days.
Thirty years ago, my whole neighborhood was not unfamiliar with seeing food stamps and they respected their parents or got the switch.
These days kids might just want to get even for having their cell phones taken away.

originally posted by: Profusion
It would have at least one huge benefit, it would make people more responsible about having children.

When my parents had me they were dirt poor with no good reason to believe they would ever come out of that situation. Was it negligent for them to have a child in that situation? Absolutely. Was it wrong to bring another person into that situation? Absolutely.

I was lucky that through blood, sweat, and tears my parents were able to pull themselves out of their situation. By my first memories (at around five years old), we had a middle class family. But, that was extremely lucky. When I was born, my parent's couldn't have predicted that they would be so fortunate five years later.

I suspect I'm going to get attacked in this thread for proposing this radical idea. People always get so idealistic about having children. However, idealism doesn't keep negligence from being negligence. I can hear the manglers of definitions of words already but we have a simple fact:

negligence

[MASS NOUN]
1Failure to take proper care over something:
his injury was due to the negligence of his employers
MORE EXAMPLE SENTENCES
SYNONYMS
1.1 Law Breach of a duty of care which results in damage.
www.oxforddictionaries.com...

We all know that negligence is rampant among parents. I think it's obvious that my proposal would help to improve that. Why be against it then?

Then there's the issue of "malpractice" among parents. My proposal would give a whole new meaning to the term "family court."

Modern humans are thought to be old based on physical aging. Physical aging does not guarantee emotional growth. Having children is part of emotionally growing and the journey continues with them. Immature emotions are manifested in systems that uphold poverty, the working poor, middle class, rich and ultra rich. Emotional growth occurs when all fields are experienced in the system. The growth encompasses the negative and positive. There is no "peak" or maxing out emotional growth in the space time we are in while we are alive here; although there is stability in emotions and actions as adults learn, apply and grow in their experiences.
Childhood is a short span. Adulthood is a long span that could have been broken down into age groups with laws and moral codes applying to each, just as with juveniles from 1 -17 yrs. Of age, but was never really done that I am aware of.
The general feeling of resentment that most people have that rides a very powerful soul sucking under current and is always a misplaced emotion that comes out in something else is the big lie we all live under. The lie can be unveiled by government disclosure.
If anyone is going to sue any ancestors, the nuclear, bioligical and chemical weapon supporters where many are baby boomers or older now, all after WWI, should be sued for putting so many at risk, unless it is disclosed that the U.S. government was actually invaded by the Natzis and WWII was a preplanned, staged event thus giving us the ability to forgive them because they too were lied to.

a reply to: redhorse

I don't quite think you got the gist of the thread there.

The OP isn't being mean hearted here, more just stating an opinion and asking our feedback.

Though I will be honest.
"When my parents had me they were dirt poor with no good reason to believe they would ever come out of that situation. Was it negligent for them to have a child in that situation? Absolutely. Was it wrong to bring another person into that situation? Absolutely".

That makes me uncomfortable reading it. I was born into an incredibly poor family and I adore my parents to death, both of them. I couldn't have asked for a better childhood and wouldn't trade anything for it. I honour my parents and always will. Money is NOT as important as people try to convince themselves it is. If you can feed, clothe and bath your child, have one. It's that simple. Not every 5 year old wants a playstation.....

So perhaps you should have been aborted instead of being born into poverty? Case closed no lawsuit because no child.


Perhaps you should just be happy to be alive.


a reply to: Profusion

Someone once told my husband and I that if you wait to have children until you are economically ready, you will never have children.

Having been a parent for five years now after fifteen years of putting it off for various reasons, I see what they meant.

As for letting children sue ... children are not emotionally and psychologically developed. That's why they aren't allowed to live on their own without adult supervision and their parents get into legal trouble if you try to let them.

a reply to: Profusion

Why be against it? Really... well here we go.

This spoiled ass useless generation of losers who are lazy, can't stand to work, and are saying nothing but Me, Me, Me now wants to "sue" their parents for "financial gain" because their sorry asses won't go support themselves.


Right...

No. Go get a job, your parents supported your sorry, worthless asses long enough. Now you want them to pay your way as an adult. This entitled, sorry ass generation of social justice losers and socialist really rubs me the wrong way.

Words of Wisdom to this Generation: GO MAKE YOUR OWN MONEY, GO SUPPORT YOURSELVES! Stop crying that life isn't handed to you on a silver platter and it isn't fair.

Life isn't fair, my parents make more than I do... Socialism, Socialism!

Let's use the power of government enforcement and make laws to legally thieve other people's property, labor, earned wealth, and prosperity and give it to us because we deserve it....

PATHETIC!

I grew up in roach infested shItholes, had sparse dental care, crooked teeth until I could afford porcelain crowns. I grew up poor, boo hoo, use that knowledge to know where you DON'T want to be in life and get out of it.

a reply to: Profusion

So parenting is all about money to you? You must be very young and must have been more privileged than you are letting on?

I was raised by poor working parents. I was blessed to be raised by honest, decent and hard working people who loved me and showed it. Money has zero to do with being a good parent I'm afraid.

Rich kids are often abused, neglected and turn out to be horrible people. They become latchkey kids who never see their parents and are raised by uncaring employees. At the same time kids coming out of poverty, but a good home, turn out just fine.

Money should never be the center of anyone's life or how they judge people. Imagine a hormone fueled teenager suing their parents out of anger they can't stay out all night, do drugs or have sex too young because their hard working, poor parents care about them enough to raise them right. Teens are very dumb and often go out of control. Your idea would be a horrible one.

a reply to: Joneselius

I get the "gist' just fine. Poverty is not a reason to make a moral judgment against people ever. And if you are saying "If you are poor you shouldn't have children and you are irresponsible enough to be sued if you do", you are making a moral judgment.

And that quote is indeed most of what I was responding to, and that quote is exactly what we should be paying attention to when it comes to the OP's mindset.

I "get" it just fine.

a reply to: Profusion

Negligence is not a result of how much money one has or does not have. Generations of children were raised during Wars, Depressions, Recessions, and a myriad of other hardships. Negligence is a result of a failure to take proper care of something according to the provided definition. I can raise a child and take care of him or her with very little money.

A very large majority, at least in our past, start families when they are young, long before they have much success in their financial lives. If we believe that we can only raise children if we are rich, or middle class then we have hit an all time low. Children need love, food, and some place to lie down at night.

A child does not need the latest X-Box or PlayStation. A child does not need a pair of Michael Jordan sneakers. A parent can raise a child without a lot of money and not be considered negligent, at least in my book. As long as they take the time to provide love to their child, teach that child right from wrong, and strive to provide the child with a better life than they themselves grew up in.

It is not a breach of duty nor negligence to be poor. I believe it should be a crime for one to think this way. There are certainly Parents out there who fail to be parents because of drug abuse, absenteeism, and just plain don't give a hoot syndrome. There are already a number of laws on the books that deal with this crime but when we make parents accountable for raising a child with caring and love and then allow a child 20 years later to sue them because he or she didn't have the new Apple I-phone, then we have indeed all failed our children

I am really astounded by the thought of suing a parent because you were born and they weren't middle class at the time, at least until you were 5 yr old.

Do you even remember being poor. Were your parent good to you? Loving? Protective? etc. Do you love them now?

I won't go into the many disadvantages and difficult situations I and my siblings had while growing ourselves up. I was bitter for a period...until about age 26 and it hit me. We, all of us, do the best we can with what we have been given to work with...through our parents. It is all about growing and learning. How would your parent benefit from being sued? How would you benefit?

edit: to apologize for sounding harsh. I just think back at all the self serving pity of myself and realize that the adversities of my life has help me be a better person in the end. Being poor should not be a prerequisite for children as long as they are fed and loved. Financial wealth is not the only nor most important poverty a family or person can suffer.

Just to throw a what if into this scenario. What if a child were to be raised by a single parent, and the other parent was court-ordered child support but never paid a dime. The parent raising the child never sought the child support, would it be right if the child at 18 could sue the negligent parent despite the other parent never pursuing it? The money was court ordered for the child regardless.

There really is nothing that can be done for Human Intelligence. Seriously, even with birth control being handed out for free in some areas there are still people having kids who should not be bringing a life into this world. Its not just negligence it's stupidity. I had my first when I was 18, was it planned? No. Was I ready to be a mother? Nope. Was it negligence on my part? Sure. Could I afford to have a baby? Hell no. should I be sued? Simply put no.

Having a child is a lot of work and responsibility and you WILL make mistakes, especially with your first one. There is no book or class or anything that can completely prepare you for having a child, at any age.

So what you are saying, is because my children who have a loving family, a roof over their head, food in their bellys, clothes on their back, shoes on their feet, an education, TV, toys, and video games, that because I was negligent 11 years ago, and brought a baby into this world, when ideally I shouldn't have, my children should have the option to sue me?