Why are we so afraid to parent our own children?

The idea that teachers should now be responsible for policing social media on top of their many other duties should be called out for what it really is — a handballing of duties, writes Louise Roberts.

We need more rules and regulations on how to run our individual family lives.

How we have been allowed free reign to raise our children as we see fit, lavishing upon them our values and life lessons, is a travesty. Clearly.

And so to this week’s diktats from folk who know better than the rest of us, here’s to undermining parental authority. Again.

Kids on social media should be spied upon by their school because there is no way they can self-regulate.

Why are we so afraid to parent our own children?, asks Louise Roberts. Artwork: Terry Pontikos

Younger children absolutely must not be told they are naughty because it carries “negative connotations”, with a UK report revealing 95 per cent of nursery workers are banned from using the word.

The word naughty, rather than make kids realise they are in the wrong, does the opposite by ‘self-perpetuating’ bad behaviour, child experts say.

With oodles of time to spare, it’s better to quarantine the child and talk them through why some things are acceptable and some are not.

Meanwhile, if a teen student tells his teacher that he believes biologically there are two genders — male and female — he risks being suspended because that opinion “is not very inclusive”.

So firstly, to the ABC’s Emma Alberici, who has developed an impressive side industry in blowing up Twitter and, this week, argued that high schools rather than parents should control kids’ use of social media.

She tweeted: “I think all high schools should have the right to do spot checks of students' (children’s) social media accounts to ensure they comply with the school ethos.

“It would surely temper some of the crude behaviour and language on there. Your thoughts?”

MORE FROM LOUISE ROBERTS: Good luck to parents who try to be their child’s friend

The responsibility of what a child gets up to online should fall to parents, not teachers. Picture: iStock

MORE FROM LOUISE ROBERTS: Competitive complaining about parenting is missing the point

Well, if you’ll allow me Emma, as a parent who knows what is best for her own children, surely we can allow our kids devices with social media accounts and show them by example how to use them safely and responsibly.

Surely everyone, even students, have a right to privacy.

Surely we can value communication and create opportunities to build trust.

And surely we can leave teachers to teaching and us, here’s a novel idea, to parenting.

Secondary schools make their social media policy perfectly clear and students know if they troll, abuse, sext or drag the school name into it, there will be consequences.

No parent wants to be shut-out, but the way to ‘intervene’ is to educate and trust. Or else our kids won’t trust us.

So called spot checks only drive underground any inappropriate behaviour and do nothing to educate. How does eavesdropping on private lives help exactly?

Or as one Twitter wit replied: “1984 was a warning not a manual.”

Emma Alberici’s tweet suggests teachers take up the monitoring of student’s social media accounts. Picture: Twitter

And this: “All children under the age of 16 should be kept locked in a sectioned part of the household until their 17th birthday at which point they are allowed out to navigate the world with no life skills.”

So much for teaching kids there are consequences to their actions. They are trainee adults, after all, and that’s pretty much parenting 101.

And don’t we just need more sensitive self-entitled adults who were never told no as a child?

Look up any stats on mental health for our young people and you will see how well a dual child centric helicopter parent approach is going.

MORE FROM LOUISE ROBERTS: Modern parents have lost sight of their purpose

One in 35 young Aussies aged 4-17 suffer a depressive disorder. One in 14 has anxiety. One in seven has a mental health condition. Death by suicide is the highest it has been in 10 years, according to Beyond Blue.

I ran the social media spot check theory past a teacher friend.

The reply was as expected: “Great! One more parenting thing being abdicated and forced onto us so if the child mucks up on social media, there is someone other than the family to blame.”

Parents need to stop trying to outsource the hard work. Picture: iStock

In other parenting obstacles, banning the word naughty is a slippery slope. What will be next?

Clever, lest we diminish or discriminate those of lesser intellect. Competitive, lest we tarnish those with different skills.

Winners, because we draw attention to the losers. Oh, but the word loser is long gone. Because every child is a winner.

When they do hear a derogatory word directed at them, kids will dissolve into a million tiny pieces of despair. That’s because they haven’t had the opportunity to nurture their resilience. Oh, maybe that word has connotations too.

MORE FROM LOUISE ROBERTS: Why do parents think it’s OK to abuse teachers?

I encourage you to google the case of the Scottish teen who secretly videoed his bombastic teacher shutting down his opinion that only two genders exist — male and female.

Free speech and reasoned debate? Evaporating from a school near you.

“Please keep that opinion to your own house” Sir ordered the unnamed 17-year-old who is protesting the “dangerous” views being “forced” on pupils.

Traditional parenting is never fashionable, however.

But all is not lost. There are plenty of us who are proudly unwoke because we chose to guide our children on tricky topics rather than ban everything in homage to the nanny state.

@whatlouthinks