Please tell me this is a joke: Court overturns father's grounding of 12-year-old

[Nitrogen]

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5h9kqGvkVPSvo-KNWFDWAg-mVfleg
I am speechless.  This HAS to be a joke, right?  RIGHT?

OTTAWA (AFP)  A Canadian court has lifted a 12-year-old girl's grounding, overturning her father's punishment for disobeying his orders to stay off the Internet, his lawyer said Wednesday.

The girl had taken her father to Quebec Superior Court after he refused to allow her to go on a school trip for chatting on websites he tried to block, and then posting "inappropriate" pictures of herself online using a friend's computer.

The father's lawyer Kim Beaudoin said the disciplinary measures were for the girl's "own protection" and is appealing the ruling.

"She's a child," Beaudoin told AFP. "At her age, children test their limits and it's up to their parents to set boundaries."

"I started an appeal of the decision today to reestablish parental authority, and to ensure that this case doesn't set a precedent," she said. Otherwise, said Beaudoin, "parents are going to be walking on egg shells from now on."

"I think most children respect their parents and would never go so far as to take them to court, but it's clear that some would and we have to ask ourselves how far this will go."

According to court documents, the girl's Internet transgression was just the latest in a string of broken house rules. Even so, Justice Suzanne Tessier found her punishment too severe.

Beaudoin noted the girl used a court-appointed lawyer in her parents' 10-year custody dispute to launch her landmark case against dear old dad.

[mtnbkr]

Holy crap!  That punishment is completely reasonable and the court overturned it (not even getting into why the court bothered with it)?  I'd have to ground the little snot for taking it to court in the first place.

There has to be more to the story...I hope.

Chris

[Manedwolf]

It's Canada.

Does anything else need to be said?

[MicroBalrog]

I suspect very much there's more to this story.

[Manedwolf]

I suspect very much there's more to this story.

No, I don't think so. They literally have thoughtcrime tribunals now.

[MicroBalrog]

I suspect very much there's more to this story.

No, I don't think so. They literally have thoughtcrime tribunals now.

They have hate speech courts. Which are bad. But such also exist in Europe, and unlike in Europe, in Canada guys like Steyn actually get acquitted. And which bears no relation to this thread. We need more detail.

[Sergeant Bob]

It's Canada.

Does anything else need to be said?

Coming Soon! To a country near you!

I suspect very much there's more to this story.

Even if there is, I have to know, WTF is the court doing in their house in the first place? (besides the obvious).

[MicroBalrog]

Even if there is, I have to know, WTF is the court doing in their house in the first place? (besides the obvious).

Perhaps the terms of the 'grounding' are somehow especially abusive. Or there are questions about the father's custody. Or whatever.

One has to give kudos to the girl, though.

[Firethorn]

Or there are questions about the father's custody. Or whatever.

That was my thought;  the family is already in court for custody hearings or whatever and this came up.

[wmenorr67]

And a court appointed lawyer handled this case. 

Waiting for the next decision that the dad needs to pay the court costs and lawyer fees for the child.

[K Frame]

That kid would be in the foster care system or up for adoption so quick she wouldn't know what hit her.

[MicroBalrog]

What I think happened is this: Complex custody case came up. Unrelated to this, the Dad may or may not be treating the girl too strictly, and the girl, being creative and unusually bright for her age, decided to utilize the situation in her interest (and the interest of every teenager, as he or she perceives it is to try and get more independence and privacy from his/her parents). And so it went.

[MicroBalrog]

That kid would be in the foster care system or up for adoption so quick she wouldn't know what hit her.

Did you mean "should"? And if yes, why?

[K Frame]

Nope, were I him I'd cut her loose. Put her up for adoption.

[MicroBalrog]

Nope, were I him I'd cut her loose. Put her up for adoption.

Ah. I understand now. Thank you for the clarification, Mr. Irwin.

[Tallpine]

Nope, were I him I'd cut her loose. Put her up for adoption.

Just take her to the dog pound

[mtnbkr]

What I think happened is this: Complex custody case came up. Unrelated to this, the Dad may or may not be treating the girl too strictly, and the girl, being creative and unusually bright for her age, decided to utilize the situation in her interest (and the interest of every teenager, as he or she perceives it is to try and get more independence and privacy from his/her parents). And so it went.

Huh?  She's 12.  At 12, she must live by the rules of the house.  She broke those rules and the punishment was not being allowed certain activities.  She was not being denied basic needs such as food, clothing, or shelter.  Not going on a school trip is pretty mild punishment for disobeying a direct order, especially considering she was "posting "inappropriate" pictures of herself online".

This isn't a civil rights issue.  This isn't even a child abuse issue.  Unless the article above is leaving out true abuses such as witholding necessities (Internet access isn't one of them), then it is simply a court system involving itself where it isn't welcome.  Frankly, if there is more to the story (real abuse for example) I would expect the article to take a tone different than "overturning a grounding".

Chris

[Iain]

I suspect the last line of the quote news article goes some way to explain the lunacy as micro suggests -

Beaudoin noted the girl used a court-appointed lawyer in her parents' 10-year custody dispute to launch her landmark case against dear old dad.

Not all the way though. Not nearly all the way. At least may in part explain the childs behaviour though.

[MicroBalrog]

Look. There's no civil rights issue here. Or any issue at all. What happens is that  starting at about 12-14  the younguns are starting to want to become more and more independent. Their parents, of course, don't want to let them. Both of those things are forces of nature.

So they struggle. Usually, the youngun wins out at a later age  like 18-20, but sometimes they win out earlier. Sometimes the parents are negligent and they let a young kid run around way before he should. Sometimes they're abusive and they don't allow a young person his or her basic independence long after they should get it. But this sort of struggle, to some degree, exists in every family. It is natural.

Parents are protective of their offspring, and their offspring, once they start to exit childhood, start chafing at the restraints. The resulting struggle is not news-worthy, really. Unless someone gets creative.

[mtnbkr]

That doesn't change the fact that this isn't the court's business and the punishment was perfectly reasonable, if not light, for the infraction. 

A 12yo posting "innapropriate" pictures of themself online is putting themselves at risk in ways they might not fully comprehend. 

Beaudoin noted the girl used a court-appointed lawyer in her parents' 10-year custody dispute to launch her landmark case against dear old dad.

Not all the way though. Not nearly all the way. At least may in part explain the childs behaviour though.

All it explains is the child learned she can use the court as a weapon against daddy.

Chris

[MrRezister]

If a court told me I didn't have the authority to ban my child from using the internet, I would politely agree with the judge and immediately stop paying for internet access.  And cable.

[roo_ster]

One has to give kudos to the girl, though.

Uh, no.  Instead of kudos from me, she'd get the back of my hand.

[Iain]

All it explains is the child learned she can use the court as a weapon against daddy.

Just like mummy and daddy do. That, and miscreant child as product of long and messy custody proceedings, is the bit that it explains, not how any judge decided that this was her domain.

[K Frame]

One has to give kudos to the girl, though.

Uh, no.  Instead of kudos from me, she'd get the back of my hand.

And bring down upon you the wrath of the Canadian Civil Rights Commission...

[RoadKingLarry]

That child would be either in the custody of her mother or the government before the sun set that day.. While he financial obligation would be met I would have no further contact untill such time as a full public apology and restitution was made.