How far does a parent's "double standard" go?

[Soldier of Entropy]

...I think this goes in this forum, maybe in morality?...
Here's the situation...
In their private residence, a teenager is working on homework after school while his father/mother is on an online non-betting card leauge(poker, hearts, etc.). The teenager comes to his parent asking for help, but the parent asks the teenager to wait until later, as he/she is in a game at the moment. Later, after the tournament is over, when the parent is not buisy, and in the private residence, not in public, the teenager respectfully points out to his/her parent that the parent imposes restrictions on the teenager's websurfing time, but does not impose said restrictions on his/her self. He/she also notes that the parent often tells the teenager to lead by example, and yet does not do so in this case. The parent refuses to answer the teenager's points except with "I am your parent," "there is a double standard," "what I say goes," etc. Who (if anyone) is out of line (see poll) and why (answer in your post)?

[drachefly]

Helping someone on something serious >> games, especially when there's nothing on the line.

Now, perhaps if the question was along the lines of, "Hey, I've got something you could help me with some time", okay; but to actively brush the kid off? Way to go, asshat.

[Zor]

The teenager has it right here, if he needs the computer (in this case he does) he/she should get to use it even if it means the parents getting off there game. His/her remark on the double standard is also correct and the parents are abusing there athourity here by brushing him off.

Zor

[The Vortex Empire]

The parent. Not helping a kid with something important because you're too busy playing games, and justifying it with "I am your parent," "there is a double standard," "what I say goes," is way out of line. It's a parent's duty to help the kid with homework if they can't do it themselves, and homework is much more important then a card game league.

[drachefly]

As I read the OP, the teen doesn't need the computer, the teen needs the parent. Is this correct?

[Soldier of Entropy]

As I read the OP, the teen doesn't need the computer, the teen needs the parent. Is this correct?

Yes, it is.

PS-I voted for the teen being right, but mostly because I hate hypocracy in all forms.

PSS-If the person who voted that the teen was out of line could come and defend their point, that would be great.

[Spetulhu]

PSS-If the person who voted that the teen was out of line could come and defend their point, that would be great.

I'm not the first to vote like that, but here's my 2 cents:
The teenager wanted help with homework but whines about surfing time. What's that got to do with anything? Respectful whining or not, I'd assume the parent pays the bills and can surf as much as he wants.

Seems the child is trying to get increased surfing privileges by making daddy feel guilty.

[Ghost Rider]

Both.

Parent should be helping the kid when asked. That's being a parent.

Kid really should not be going "But you surf the net more then I do, no fair!", because it's nothing more then presenting a red herring. Helping the child is one thing, what the parent does in his/her free time is that parent's business, not the kid.

[Soldier of Entropy]

Both.

Parent should be helping the kid when asked. That's being a parent.

Kid really should not be going "But you surf the net more then I do, no fair!", because it's nothing more then presenting a red herring. Helping the child is one thing, what the parent does in his/her free time is that parent's business, not the kid.

I guess i should have made this more clear, but when I said "later" I meant after the problem with homework was resolved. The issue of not getting off to help and being a hypocrit are both valid to be discussed in reference to this poll.

[Jew]

When you ask for help, you need to accomodate the schedule of the person you're asking. I wouldn't expect someone to instantly drop what he's doing to help me unless it's a matter of imminent bodily injury. So in this situation, I see no problem with the parent telling his child to wait while he finishes his online game.

The question of surfing restrictions is unrelated to the situation at hand. The parent's activity could have been something else entirely. If the parent had been busy cooking, or busy reading, or busy playing an actual game of cards, it's still the same: the child should not feel unduly burdened that he has to wait until the parent is done.

The underlying assumption here is that the online game is unimportant, and that the parent has no right to continue an unimportant activity when the child needs help. I believe that is an unwarranted assumption. There may be many reasons why the parent should continue playing the game instead of immediately quitting. On the other hand, maybe there really was no reason, and the parent was just being a jerk. We don't have enough information to know. But given that the parent did later help the child, I'd say the presumption is that the parent is acting responsibly.

[Ghost Rider]

When you ask for help, you need to accomodate the schedule of the person you're asking. I wouldn't expect someone to instantly drop what he's doing to help me unless it's a matter of imminent bodily injury. So in this situation, I see no problem with the parent telling his child to wait while he finishes his online game.

The question of surfing restrictions is unrelated to the situation at hand. The parent's activity could have been something else entirely. If the parent had been busy cooking, or busy reading, or busy playing an actual game of cards, it's still the same: the child should not feel unduly burdened that he has to wait until the parent is done.

The underlying assumption here is that the online game is unimportant, and that the parent has no right to continue an unimportant activity when the child needs help. I believe that is an unwarranted assumption. There may be many reasons why the parent should continue playing the game instead of immediately quitting. On the other hand, maybe there really was no reason, and the parent was just being a jerk. We don't have enough information to know. But given that the parent did later help the child, I'd say the presumption is that the parent is acting responsibly.

I'd really like to hear how an online game supercedes your child needing help.

The fact that thought enters your mind does scare me in that you think that's parenting.

[Ghost Rider]

Both.

Parent should be helping the kid when asked. That's being a parent.

Kid really should not be going "But you surf the net more then I do, no fair!", because it's nothing more then presenting a red herring. Helping the child is one thing, what the parent does in his/her free time is that parent's business, not the kid.

I guess i should have made this more clear, but when I said "later" I meant after the problem with homework was resolved. The issue of not getting off to help and being a hypocrit are both valid to be discussed in reference to this poll.

Doesn't change my point at all.

Kid is asking the parent "You're spending more time on the net then I am!!!"

And? Unless the kid is paying for said internet, he/she has really no real say on the owners using it. Same thing applies to everything else the parents own that the kid doesn't.

[Ghost Rider]

And Off to SLAM, given the discussion material.

[Soldier of Entropy]

Both.

Parent should be helping the kid when asked. That's being a parent.

Kid really should not be going "But you surf the net more then I do, no fair!", because it's nothing more then presenting a red herring. Helping the child is one thing, what the parent does in his/her free time is that parent's business, not the kid.

I guess i should have made this more clear, but when I said "later" I meant after the problem with homework was resolved. The issue of not getting off to help and being a hypocrit are both valid to be discussed in reference to this poll.

Doesn't change my point at all.

Kid is asking the parent "You're spending more time on the net then I am!!!"

And? Unless the kid is paying for said internet, he/she has really no real say on the owners using it. Same thing applies to everything else the parents own that the kid doesn't.

That was in reply to the "red herring" part. If that part is over, then it cannot be a red herring at that time, right?

[Covenant]

The kid shouldn't get all huffy because their parent is playing a game, and then complain about how there's a double-standard and such. The standard isn't so obvious though--the kid has to do homework, that's their job. School is their real occupation during those years. The parent needs to do their job as well, but it's no more out of line for them to play a game than it is for the kid. Plus, a child's websurfing privledge is indeed just a privledge.

Now, if the kid had said "I need to get on" and the Dad played all night, then he'd be spot on. But if the question was related to homework, which is essentially still the kid's responsibility, the parent doesn't need to drop everything they're doing and scramble. As a kid, I never had problems telling parents ahead of time that I'd like some help after dinner with my homework, and then they could plan some time to do so.

However, I checked both, since the parent didn't just finish their game or get to a spot they could stop, they just kept going and gave a bullshit response.

Can we have more info about the time? If it was like a matter of an hour or less, the Kid really shouldn't be that put out. If it was several hours later that the parent finished playing and was ready to help, that's completely unreasonable and the kid is totally justified. Being a parent involves helping your kid with school when they need it, but you don't need to drop everything. If it's a game you can pause, sure, pause it and help. If it's something you can't pause, sit out after you finish. But communication is really the issue here, on both sides. Kids can't expect to have someone snap to it when they ask, and Parent's can't shirk their responsibilities behind the mantle of being a parent. You're not parenting if you act like that.

I'm saying it's mostly the parent's idiocy in this case, but if it only took the kid a half hour to finish, then they really shouldn't complain. This is homework afterall, and kids really should be able to do most of their homework on their own. If the kid doesn't understand something they should know enough to skip it and come back later after dinner or whatnot when the Parent is ready and the busy time of night is over, and they can get help on that.

[Soldier of Entropy]

The parent took about an hour to finish. However, the teenager is not simply complaining that the parent is taking too long; he/she is also making an observation on the parent's hypocricy.

[Covenant]

Well, it's hardly hypocritical in a simple hour-long case. The parent's situation and the student's situation are different. A parent can put limits on a student's internet use because the parent is paying for it, and it's essentially just a TV hooked into a wall. A parent can limit the amount of TV as well, for similar sorts of reasons.

The parent, however, already has a job and a family and a life. If they now, having already completed all the tasks that face their young offspring, choose to spend a bit of time on an hour of gameplay then it's really not out of line. It's like saying that Student A and Student B should both get equal amounts of free time, despite the fact that student A can finish his homework equally well in half of the time.

If the kid can finish his homework well, and get to bed at a reasonable time, and complete whatever other tasks he needs to do (reading, chores, cleaning, whatever), goofing off is probably okay. But the parent, who seems to be keeping their job just fine, is student A in this case.

[Covenant]

I wanted to followup--I felt that I left something out.

Mostly, it seems like the kid isn't looking at the right perspective, and that's the problem of hypocrisy accusations. To the kid, the parent isn't putting limits on himself and isn't doing what he would make the kid do. The kid is assuming that the parent and the child both require the same limitations, and that's the error. Kids have special limits that parents and adults don't have, that's just par for the course. Understanding that freedoms come from quality perfomance is important though, and it helps kids mature. Playing a game all night would be bad, but an hour isn't a long wait, especially if it only took less than an hour to fix the problem on his own.

However, the parent does follow up with the kid an hour later, so he did indeed put a limit on his own gaming AND show up to make himself available for help, after he had been requested and finished what he was doing, as is reasonable. The kid HAS to do their homework, the parent doesn't really have to help them, let alone right then. They SHOULD, but it's not a group assignment, and I doubt the material was designed to be beyond the student's capabilities. They've gotta learn it for the test eventually anyway. The situation also assumes the parent is any good at the subject, and that the student's problem couldn't be solved with some more reading. You learn a lot by working through it on your own, so the first impulse shouldn't be to demand help right now but to try again.

It also encourages good time management, since you ask for help ahead of time, work on what you know, and then present an articulated question and what exactly is confusing you later. Otherwise it's like saying "My time is very valuable, but yours isn't. Come help me with my problem that is my responsibility because it would take more time to do it on my own."

Since the problem resolved itself an hour later, and it didn't seem to require anything but hard work, I don't see the snag. The parent shouldn't shield the kid from effort, just help them when they're stuck out of the interests of furthering education. If the kid just needed to re-read the chapter or something, and it took an extra 15 minutes, then it's really pretty selfish to claim the parent needs to stop everything right then to help them NOW. THAT would be hypocrisy.

Leading by example is another thing. I'm not seeing a failure of leadership here, and I think it's good that the parent demonstrated restraint in rushing to help. It's a bad standard to let kids think it's okay to pressure someone for something right now and expect results, since they shouldn't do that later in life with bosses and employers, and they should also not accept that kind of behavior from other people either. It's just rude. The parent's explination is still bullshit of course, but it doesn't seem like a gross failure of leadership.

[Shannon]

From the information we've been given, it seems to me that the only way the parent could actually be a hypocrite is if there was a specific family rule regarding web surfing, to wit, that all other important tasks, such as homework, had to be completed before any such surfing could take place. If that's the case, then the parent is violating the rule and is indeed a hypocrite since it is their parental duty to help their offspring with said homework.

However, if as has been pointed out before, the interval before the parent finished playing was really quite short, and the parent was well into the game before knowing that the child needed help, then their hypocrisy is minimal. Parents need down time too, and it really doesn't inconvenience the child that much to wait half an hour or an hour; if they have other homework, they can work on that instead. If the interval was longer, say a few hours, then the kid has a stronger case. The same applies if there was some other pressing duty that the child was expected to fulfil later that would preclude them returning to their homework. In that case, I'd say that yes, the parent was failing in their duty and would need to provide an explanation to the child's teacher the following day (assuming the work was due then). And believe me, I've seen some bullshit excuses from parents in my teaching career.

From a teacher's POV, there really shouldn't be anything that the child can't reasonably do on their own in homework anyway, though of course that's not always the case, and parental help is something to be expected. In this case it seems that the child was capable of solving the problem on their own and thus really didn't need to bug the parent about it - they had enough resources on their own to do it and they didn't need the computer either. When looking at it this way, it seems more like the child is taking a gratuitous shot at the parent over a perceived rule violation. No one likes being called a hypocrite and this may be why the parent didn't respond more constructively.

So I guess my answer is really contingent on more information being provided. So far, it looks like Both, and that's what I'm voting.

[Darth Servo]

Kid is asking the parent "You're spending more time on the net then I am!!!"

And? Unless the kid is paying for said internet, he/she has really no real say on the owners using it. Same thing applies to everything else the parents own that the kid doesn't.

THATS a red herring since the parent probably restricts the kid's time on the net regardless of if the kid surfs at home or at the library.

[Big Phil]

The kid is in the wrong... assuming that once the game was over the parent was willing to help. This entire scenario just smacks of teenage arrogance - HELP ME RIGHT NOW OR YOU'RE A HYPOCRITE!!! WAA!

The parent should have probably phrased it differently (i.e., can I help you in an hour when I'm finished with this game?), but this is hardly some great ethical dilemma.

[Soldier of Entropy]

I was asked for more info, and here it is:
The whole idea of "is it the parent's responsibility to get off now to help?" was actually not what I was origionally going for (though I am glad it went this way, it is interesting); I was using the scenario of homework help just to form a catalyst for the situation. What I was getting at at my original post was more along the lines of what Darth Servo was getting at; that the parent restricts web time, yet on a daily basis plays on the card leauge over more hours per day on average then he/she allows for his/her child. However, on the subject of other work, yes the teenager had other work, but he could come back to the current work later and work on other work. I hadn't given much thought to that; it wasn't my origional issue idea.

[Ghost Rider]

Kid is asking the parent "You're spending more time on the net then I am!!!"

And? Unless the kid is paying for said internet, he/she has really no real say on the owners using it. Same thing applies to everything else the parents own that the kid doesn't.

THATS a red herring since the parent probably restricts the kid's time on the net regardless of if the kid surfs at home or at the library.

You're shitting me? You're assuming something to go "He restricts elsewhere." We don't know, thus you want to pull something out of your ass to make the situation favor you?

Fucking A, you know that doesn't fly.

[Soldier of Entropy]

Kid is asking the parent "You're spending more time on the net then I am!!!"

And? Unless the kid is paying for said internet, he/she has really no real say on the owners using it. Same thing applies to everything else the parents own that the kid doesn't.

THATS a red herring since the parent probably restricts the kid's time on the net regardless of if the kid surfs at home or at the library.

You're shitting me? You're assuming something to go "He restricts elsewhere." We don't know, thus you want to pull something out of your ass to make the situation favor you?

Fucking A, you know that doesn't fly.

Okay, at the time I don't know if it could be assumed, but let me clarify that he was right in this case; the parent does.

[Ghost Rider]

I was asked for more info, and here it is:
The whole idea of "is it the parent's responsibility to get off now to help?" was actually not what I was origionally going for (though I am glad it went this way, it is interesting); I was using the scenario of homework help just to form a catalyst for the situation. What I was getting at at my original post was more along the lines of what Darth Servo was getting at; that the parent restricts web time, yet on a daily basis plays on the card leauge over more hours per day on average then he/she allows for his/her child. However, on the subject of other work, yes the teenager had other work, but he could come back to the current work later and work on other work. I hadn't given much thought to that; it wasn't my origional issue idea.

Does the parent pay for the internet bills?

If so, then it's his/her to do with. Sorry, when you do not pay for the object, you have very little say in how it is being used, unless one can make a reason that it must be used for a reason.

The same can easily apply to a car, and it's the same answer. You are not the owner, tough.