Thread: Childrens' Phone Calls Off-Limits to Parents

FYI...what say ye to this?

Wash. Parents Barred From Listening To Kids' Calls
17-Year-Old's Confession To Girlfriend Not Admissable

POSTED: 4:57 pm EST December 9, 2004
UPDATED: 7:34 am EST December 10, 2004

Parents in Washington state who want to listen in on their kids' phone conversations will have to think twice from now on.

The state's Supreme Court has ruled that it's illegal.

The court ruled that a 17-year-old boy should get a new trial on purse-snatching charges. His girlfriend's mother testified that she heard him discuss the crime when she listened in on his conversation with her daughter.

The court ruled that the daughter and her boyfriend had a reasonable expectation of privacy on the phone.

Washington state law prohibits intercepting or recording conversations without the consent of all participants.

http://www.nbc4.com/family/3986096/detail.html

That ruling blurs the line between legal childhood and adulthood--a line that exists for very good reasons--and obscures the definition of a family, with minors under the care of parents. If that mindset is continued, what will be next? Ten-year-olds being able to file harrassment charges toward their parents for taking away priviledges?

While troubling, this is typical assessment of a complicated matter by people who don't know what they are talking about.

This does not make listening to your kid's calls "illegal" it just means that the police cannot use it as evidence in a trial. Moreover, it was not the mother of the perpetrator, and he was not using the phone of the eavesdropper. In fact there was no relationship. So it would be like you calling me, my wife listening in and the police using the conversation against you.

God deliver us from the local news.

Good points, Fred.

Originally posted by fredtgreco
While troubling, this is typical assessment of a complicated matter by people who don't know what they are talking about.

This does not make listening to your kid's calls "illegal" it just means that the police cannot use it as evidence in a trial. Moreover, it was not the mother of the perpetrator, and he was not using the phone of the eavesdropper. In fact there was no relationship. So it would be like you calling me, my wife listening in and the police using the conversation against you.

I see. Thanks for clarifying the issue on which that article presumed to speak.

Originally posted by fredtgreco
God deliver us from the local news.

Indeed.