Should primary schools report families for allowing kids 18 games?

[Kizzy]

'Primary school headteachers have warned parents who allow their children to play video games such as Call Of Duty and Grand Theft Auto will be reported to police and social services for neglect.

The Nantwich Education Partnership, made up of 15 primary schools and one secondary academy, issued a letter after children reported playing or watching the adult-themed games.

The heads said the games could increase "early sexualised behaviours" and the advice was in line with local authority policy and concerns.

The letter, sent last month, said: "Several children have reported playing or watching adults play games which are inappropriate for their age and they have described the levels of violence and sexual content they have witnessed: Call Of Duty, Grand Theft Auto, Dogs Of War and other similar games are all inappropriate for children and they should not have access to them'

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/03/29/call-of-duty_n_6963666.html

[Crimson Dynamo]

Smallest boy LT completed GTAV ages ago and is now almost finished with Plants V Zombies Garden Warfare

Fifa 15 is a constant however

[JoshBB]

Ummm... no.

Most games are over-rated (in terms of age) anyway. I agree with some games very sexual in nature not being suitable for children but it's up to the parents imo

[T*]

why dont we bubble wrap all children under 10 whilst we're at it :umm2:

[T*]

i literally dont see why you'd be so sensitive over this
you see worse on tv

[Crimson Dynamo]

GTAV is just swearing and you here worse on the school bus

plus its a top game

[Jøsh]

but it's up to the parents imo

I agree.

[Crimson Dynamo]

The heads said the games could increase "early sexualised behaviours"


evidence please

[Ramsay]

Dogs of War rofl
Excellent idea. less chance of running into annoying 10 year olds online :clap1:

[Vicky.]

No they should keep their noses out tbh. If parents feel their kid is mature enough to realise its just a game, then thats up to them. Ratings are usually ridiculous anyway

If a 5 year old went into school and said they had been playing gta I would be concerned, but older kids, no way.

[RichardG]

I played a few 18 rated games when I was young, it hasn't done me any harm.

[Cherie]

Seeing as primary school stretches from 3 to 11, I think in some cases yes they should, 6 year olds should not be playing COD etc online, Whilst the game itself might not be too bad, its the online aspect and the people they are playing with that would concern me, if the are in a game with much older children or adults who are swearing and generally being loutish It is not appropriate.

[kirklancaster]

Seeing as primary school stretches from 3 to 11, I think in some cases yes they should, 6 year olds should not be playing COD etc online, Whilst the game itself might not be too bad, its the online aspect and the people they are playing with that would concern me, if the are in a game with much older children or adults who are swearing and generally being loutish It is not appropriate.

:clap1::clap1::clap1:

[Cherie]

:clap1::clap1::clap1:

That post made me sound like I am 109 :hehe:

[Vicky.]

Seeing as primary school stretches from 3 to 11, I think in some cases yes they should, 6 year olds should not be playing COD etc online, Whilst the game itself might not be too bad, its the online aspect and the people they are playing with that would concern me, if the are in a game with much older children or adults who are swearing and generally being loutish It is not appropriate.

I completely missed the 'primary' part and assume seniors :facepalm:

10/11 ish I think is generally old enough to play these games I think. They don't deserve their 18 rating (then again nothing does really)

[BBfanUSA]

Vicky please don't say that...

That would mean more squeaky voices blaring in my ear

[kirklancaster]

That post made me sound like I am 109 :hehe:

Not at all - just sensible. Some kids can play adult games and remain unscathed but not all. It is wiser - in my opinion - to err on the side of caution.

What is this 'modern' obsession with rushing kids into being adults before they've even enjoyed a childhood? Bleaching hair, make up, piercings, jewellery - some even having their three year old's tattooed.

Yes, parents should have input, but, I'm afraid, that immature kids are increasingly becoming parents these days and immature kids are not always the best judge of what is best for themselves - let alone their kids.

[Crimson Dynamo]

smallest boy LT does not get to go online

but I decide on what games he can play and i dont bother with the classifications - I do the research and the walkthroughs first

[Livia]

Sadly not all parents make great judgement calls.

[Tom4784]

How about we let parents parent their own children?

I played and watched violent video games and films from a young age and so did most people I know and it's never affected us because we can separate fiction from reality. Game aren't harmful, people just use them as a scapegoat for their own agendas.

It's not illegal for someone under 18 to play 18 rated games, it's only illegal for kids to buy them. Whether kids should be allowed to play them or not should be solely down to their parents not some stupid backwards schools that don't know their elbow from their arse.

[Livia]

I agree with all that Dezzy. Sadly the parents who make good judgement calls are lumped into the same pigeon hole as those parents who don't in cases like this.

[arista]

Should primary schools report families for allowing kids 18 games?


Yes report them
they are 18 rated games GTA5
can change a child who spends 6 hours on it

[Crimson Dynamo]

What is worrying is they are using words like "could"

Parents were also warned about allowing their youngsters to have accounts on social media sites such as Facebook and WhatsApp because it could make them vulnerable to sexual grooming.

The letter went on: "Access to these games or to some social media sites such as those above increases early sexualised behaviours (sometimes harmful) in children and leaves them vulnerable to grooming for sexual exploitation or extreme violence."

I would be interested in any evidence they are basing this on

[lily.]

No.

[arista]

How about we let parents parent their own children?

I played and watched violent video games and films from a young age and so did most people I know and it's never affected us because we can separate fiction from reality. Game aren't harmful, people just use them as a scapegoat for their own agendas.

It's not illegal for someone under 18 to play 18 rated games, it's only illegal for kids to buy them. Whether kids should be allowed to play them or not should be solely down to their parents not some stupid backwards schools that don't know their elbow from their arse.


Yes so Parents that buy them
are Fecking Guilty.

And Never mind about when you was a child
GTA5 in 1080P on a Massive 1080P TV Screen
is a world away from your history.

[arista]

http://screenshots.en.sftcdn.net/blog/en/2013/07/franklinshooter.jpg

No Dezzy
its not meant for a child
Fact

[Cherie]

http://screenshots.en.sftcdn.net/blog/en/2013/07/franklinshooter.jpg

No Dezzy
its not meant for a child
Fact

:clap1:

[lily.]

... it's up to the parents imo...

Totally Agree.

...but I decide on what games he can play and i dont bother with the classifications - I do the research and the walkthroughs first...

Same. And, when in the game shops I ask the staff if they have played it and how they felt the rating reflects on the actual gameplay.

...How about we let parents parent their own children?...

http://img.pandawhale.com/28643-Citizen-Kane-Orson-Welles-appl-xIlv.gif

[lily.]

Arista, do you have children? If not, then you really don't know wtf you are talking about. Kids are all different, in terms of maturity, and you can't bang an age rating on it and do a one-size-fits-all.

[Cherie]

smallest boy LT does not get to go online

but I decide on what games he can play and i dont bother with the classifications - I do the research and the walkthroughs first

That is completely different, there are very young children online playing these games with strangers, I wonder if their parents even know they can get online and do this :shrug:

[arista]

http://img1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20150105100859/gtawiki/images/c/c9/GTA_V_Last_Generation.png
not for children

[lily.]

What about toy guns arista?

[Kizzy]

Arista, do you have children? If not, then you really don't know wtf you are talking about. Kids are all different, in terms of maturity, and you can't bang an age rating on it and do a one-size-fits-all.

That's not very fair hardly anyone commenting has kids.

[arista]

What about toy guns arista?


That has nothing to do with this debate

[lily.]

It has everything to do with it. You are highlighting guns in your posts. How are toy guns and video game guns any different?

[Crimson Dynamo]

i played with toy guns as a child and read war comics, watched war movies and cowboy and indian films and so far I have not killed anyone

[arista]

It has everything to do with it. You are highlighting guns in your posts. How are toy guns and video game guns any different?


Yes Guns used in GTA5
and a knife
are based on real guns.

[Tom4784]

http://screenshots.en.sftcdn.net/blog/en/2013/07/franklinshooter.jpg

No Dezzy
its not meant for a child
Fact

That's not for you to decide, it's the child's parents' decision. Not yours.

That is completely different, there are very young children online playing these games with strangers, I wonder if their parents even know they can get online and do this :shrug:

There are child safety options on most consoles both current and last generation. It's up to the parents to set them and oversee what their child is playing.

[lily.]

And toy guns are based on what?

[arista]

i played with toy guns as a child and read war comics, watched war movies and cowboy and indian films and so far I have not killed anyone


Sure but like Dezzy
you never had 1080P GTA5
as a child.

[lily.]

Why is the screen size/resolution so important?

[arista]

That's not for you to decide, it's the child's parents' decision. Not yours.



There are child safety options on most consoles both current and last generation. It's up to the parents to set them and oversee what their child is playing.


Many Parents are not aware
Thats why Schools can deal with this 18 Rated Game

[Marsh.]

i played with toy guns as a child and read war comics, watched war movies and cowboy and indian films and so far I have not killed anyone

No but it's had a negative effect on your psyche. :nono:

[arista]

Why is the screen size/resolution so important?



Because it inspires more
Looks more real.

[lily.]

Many Parents are not aware
Thats why Schools can deal with this 18 Rated Game

If parents are not aware, then they are obviously not very good parents, in which case there will be bigger issues to contend with than video games.

[Kizzy]

If parents are not aware, then they are obviously not very good parents, in which case there will be bigger issues to contend with than video games.

Isn't that more or less the opinion of the school?

[Crimson Dynamo]

No but it's had a negative effect on your psyche. :nono:

watch it i will blow your head off with an RPG

:omgno:

[Crimson Dynamo]

9wO1Ve34qBA

[kirklancaster]

No but it's had a negative effect on your psyche. :nono:

:joker::joker::joker:

QUOTE = LeatherTrumpet

No but it's had a negative effect on your psyche.
watch it i will blow your head off with an RPG

:joker::joker::joker:

Your turn Marsh. :laugh:

[lily.]

Isn't that more or less the opinion of the school?

No. I think the school is using video games as a scapegoat.

Maybe they ought to be looking into the upbringing of some of the 'at risk' kids, instead of making sweeping generalisations about parents who do allow kids to play adult videogames.

[Cherie]

That's not for you to decide, it's the child's parents' decision. Not yours.


If children are behaving inappropriately in school then school have a right to employ safeguarding, no one want their child exposed to inappropriate behaviour f


There are child safety options on most consoles both current and last generation. It's up to the parents to set them and oversee what their child is playing.


Yes but some are not using it so maybe they need educating

[Livia]

i played with toy guns as a child and read war comics, watched war movies and cowboy and indian films and so far I have not killed anyone

You're probably not a great example if your going for the "grew up normal" angle.

[Crimson Dynamo]

You're probably not a great example if your going for the "grew up normal" angle.

:laugh2:

[Tom4784]

Yes but some are not using it so maybe they need educating

That's their own responsibility, not the schools'.

[Kazanne]

Seeing as primary school stretches from 3 to 11, I think in some cases yes they should, 6 year olds should not be playing COD etc online, Whilst the game itself might not be too bad, its the online aspect and the people they are playing with that would concern me, if the are in a game with much older children or adults who are swearing and generally being loutish It is not appropriate.

I agree,well said:worship:

[Cherie]

That's their own responsibility, not the schools'.

It is the schools responsibility if a child acts inappropriately while on school premises or are you suggesting they ignore it.

[lily.]

You're probably not a great example if your going for the "grew up normal" angle.

lol

[Tom4784]

It is the schools responsibility if a child acts inappropriately while on school premises or are you suggesting they ignore it.

Yeah, but if a kid is misbehaving to such an extent then there's obviously something seriously wrong and the problem won't lie with what games they're playing.

Blaming games is a scapegoat and by doing it people are ignoring the real issues at hand.

[lily.]

Yeah, but if a kid is misbehaving to such an extent then there's obviously something seriously wrong and the problem won't lie with what games they're playing.

Blaming games is a scapegoat and by doing it people are ignoring the real issues at hand.

Agree with this. A lot of times, there's a clear problem with kids and the school don't want to address it. Making a big hullaballoo about videogames doesn't really solve this issue.

[Cherie]

Yeah, but if a kid is misbehaving to such an extent then there's obviously something seriously wrong and the problem won't lie with what games they're playing.

Blaming games is a scapegoat and by doing it people are ignoring the real issues at hand.

No its not scapegoating, its been well documented that some children are heavily influenced by what they watch or play Jamie Bulger's killers being a case in point, if it saves one child from his fate I don't see the issue really.

[Kizzy]

There is obviously an established pattern emerging, if this is how the school wish to tackle the issue if some parents refuse to acknowledge the seriousness of the problem manifesting then as guardians too they have that right.

[lily.]

No its not scapegoating, its been well documented that some children are heavily influenced by what they watch or play Jamie Bulger's killers being a case in point, if it saves one child from his fate I don't see the issue really.

I think there might have been more to the Jamie Bulger murderers than videogames. You do realise the type of home they lived in, right? There was a pattern of child neglect. Videogames were not the big problem.

[Tom4784]

No its not scapegoating, its been well documented that some children are heavily influenced by what they watch or play Jamie Bulger's killers being a case in point, if it saves one child from his fate I don't see the issue really.

No, it's absolving someone of their guilt.

'Oh it's not their fault they killed someone, the game made them do it'

**** that **** and **** anyone who believes it. the killers are to blame for Jamie Bulger's death, nothing else.

Blaming games is just an excuse for parents not to do any actual parenting.

[Crimson Dynamo]

No its not scapegoating, its been well documented that some children are heavily influenced by what they watch or play Jamie Bulger's killers being a case in point, if it saves one child from his fate I don't see the issue really.

locking a;ll children in jails will reduce cases like Bulger and will drastically reduce the number of children killed outside by cars, rivers etc

[Ramsay]

No, it's absolving someone of their guilt.

'Oh it's not their fault they killed someone, the game made them do it'

**** that **** and **** anyone who believes it. the killers are to blame for Jamie Bulger's death, nothing else.

Blaming games is just an excuse for parents not to do any actual parenting.

Yes, yes and yes! so much truth :worship:

[Cherie]

I think there might have been more to the Jamie Bulger murderers than videogames. You do realise the type of home they lived in, right? There was a pattern of child neglect. Videogames were not the big problem.

No, it's absolving someone of their guilt.

'Oh it's not their fault they killed someone, the game made them do it'

**** that **** and **** anyone who believes it. the killers are to blame for Jamie Bulger's death, nothing else.

Blaming games is just an excuse for parents not to do any actual parenting.


The games are a side issue it will focus the attention on the parents and what is going on at home which again I think is a good thing. If as you say most kids can separate fact from fiction that is great but for the small minority who can't and who display inappropriate behaviour and whose parents do not want to take responsibility for their upbringing I see no issue.

[Kizzy]

Oh well let's ignore any psychological analysis and criminal profiling.
This could be part...a big one, I agree cherie with the Bulger case of a 'perfect storm' of violence.

[lily.]

The games are a side issue it will focus the attention on the parents and what is going on at home which again I think is a good thing. If as you say most kids can separate fact from fiction that is great but for the small minority who can't and who display inappropriate behaviour and whose parents do not want to take responsibility for their upbringing I see no issue.

The issue is this:

"'Primary school headteachers have warned parents who allow their children to play video games such as Call Of Duty and Grand Theft Auto will be reported to police and social services for neglect."

All parents will be reported for neglect, regardless of any other factors. Lumping good parents in with bad, instead of focusing on those who need intervention.

[RichardG]

No, it's absolving someone of their guilt.

'Oh it's not their fault they killed someone, the game made them do it'

**** that **** and **** anyone who believes it. the killers are to blame for Jamie Bulger's death, nothing else.

Blaming games is just an excuse for parents not to do any actual parenting.

If you remove the video games then it becomes the fault of that movie they watched or that tv show they love. Aggressive people existed before technology and aggressive people continue to exist today, now they just have an excuse!

[Kizzy]

The issue is this:

"'Primary school headteachers have warned parents who allow their children to play video games such as Call Of Duty and Grand Theft Auto will be reported to police and social services for neglect."

All parents will be reported for neglect, regardless of any other factors. Lumping good parents in with bad, instead of focusing on those who need intervention.

There is no 'good' and 'bad' in this instance.

If you allow your child to play the game then by definition that is against their policy in the eyes of the school.

[arista]

Police Threat Over Children Playing Adult Games

A letter sent to parents in Nantwich warns letting children play adult games could be "neglect" and could see them reported.

http://news.sky.com/story/1454885/police-threat-over-children-playing-adult-games


same story as Kizzys first link post

[Tom4784]

There is no 'good' and 'bad' in this instance.

If you allow your child to play the game then by definition that is against their policy in the eyes of the school.

It's no ****ing business of the school's what a kid gets up to in their own time.

What's next, are they going to insist on dictating what the pupils have for meals at home? What activities they get up to on Holidays and weekends? Should they just insist on moving a teacher into every household to take over parenting duties? Let parents be ****ing parents.

It's micromanaging when they have no business doing so. The Schools should only intervene if there's something seriously wrong, not just because they don't like that kids play video games.

[Tom4784]

I hope these schools get done for wasting the police's time if they actually ever go through with this. It's honestly ridiculous and I don't understand why anyone would defend this.

[Kizzy]

It's no ****ing business of the school's what a kid gets up to in their own time.

What's next, are they going to insist on dictating what the pupils have for meals at home? What activities they get up to on Holidays and weekends? Should they just insist on moving a teacher into every household to take over parenting duties? Let parents be ****ing parents.

It's micromanaging when they have no business doing so. The Schools should only intervene if there's something seriously wrong, not just because they don't like that kids play video games.

If it's having a marked effect on their behaviour and language in school then yes it's justified, it's an extreme measure but not one I think was taken lightly.

[Kazanne]

I think there might have been more to the Jamie Bulger murderers than videogames. You do realise the type of home they lived in, right? There was a pattern of child neglect. Videogames were not the big problem.

There may have been more to James murder,but,a certain video game played a part that is fact,as for their home lives ,they were no different than thousands of other children,the one came from a broken home,the ones father liked a drink,I know what kids see influences them,I've seen it with my own eyes.I can see nothing wrong with schools pointing out the dangers of some videos.

[Tom4784]

If it's having a marked effect on their behaviour and language in school then yes it's justified, it's an extreme measure but not one I think was taken lightly.

Perhaps you should read the article properly.

Several children have reported playing or watching adults play games which are inappropriate for their age and they have described the levels of violence and sexual content they have witnessed: Call Of Duty, Grand Theft Auto, Dogs Of War and other similar games are all inappropriate for children and they should not have access to them," the letter said.

"If your child is allowed to have inappropriate access to any game or associated product that is designated 18-plus we are advised to contact the police and children's social care as it is neglectful.

It's got nothing to do with the kids' behavior, the school is literally threatening parents to comply or be reported on no grounds apart from their own self indulgent ignorance.

[Tom4784]

There may have been more to James murder,but,a certain video game played a part that is fact,as for their home lives ,they were no different than thousands of other children,the one came from a broken home,the ones father liked a drink,I know what kids see influences them,I've seen it with my own eyes.I can see nothing wrong with schools pointing out the dangers of some videos.

At best games can be a trigger but ANYTHING can be a trigger. Blaming games is just moronic. A smell or a colour or a certain sight could trigger a killer to kill. Do you just want to ban everything just in case and hope that the absence of a trigger isn't in itself a trigger?

[Kizzy]

Perhaps you should read the article properly.



It's got nothing to do with the kids' behavior, the school is literally threatening parents to comply or be reported on no grounds apart from their own self indulgent ignorance.

I did read the article thankyou.


Again this action could've been a culmination of events 'they have described the levels of violence and sexual content they have witnessed'

why would this be raised in a primary school environment if the children had not been acting out or displaying behaviours which were seen as inappropriate, and questioned on it?

[Crimson Dynamo]

Perhaps you should read the article properly.



It's got nothing to do with the kids' behavior, the school is literally threatening parents to comply or be reported on no grounds apart from their own self indulgent ignorance.

:clap1:

[Stu]

Schools themselves are largely to blame for spawning a violent, prejudiced troupe of pre teen non compos mentis lunatics. They are petri dishes of unchallenged bullying and impassive, imagination starved education modules and combined with the absence of any decent parents either to help steer the sails the whole affair becomes a ticking time bomb.

So in essence they should worry about what's going on in their own damn yards. Or actually take cues from developers like Rockstar who've managed to actually program some semblance of cultural narrative into their own particular output.

[JoshBB]

loony left being loonies again........... oh wait, it's not. because most of us agree that it's none of the schools business

[Tom4784]

I did read the article thankyou.


Again this action could've been a culmination of events 'they have described the levels of violence and sexual content they have witnessed'

why would this be raised in a primary school environment if the children had not been acting out or displaying behaviours which were seen as inappropriate, and questioned on it?

So you're supporting this based on things that may not have happened? Nothing written in the letter suggests that the school's threats are a result of an increase of bad behavior. It's just the schools trying to control everything and you've fallen hook line and sinker for it based purely on an argument that was formed in your own imagination.

[AnnieK]

If the school believe that video games are having a detrimental effect on behaviour, they should advise parents of this but they cannot control what children do outside of school time IMO. Obviously, they have set protocols for behaviour issues which would then be followed if the behaviour did not improve. It seems crazy to think that parents would be reported just for the children claiming to have played these games....I claimed to have watched V (TV series) when I was in primary school because loads of kids said they watched it, truth was I wasn't allowed but it didn't stop me saying I watched it. Not quite sure how a school would prove a child was actually playing the game anyway....if it's in the house surely the parent could be the owner / player....

[joeysteele]

Ummm... no.

Most games are over-rated (in terms of age) anyway. I agree with some games very sexual in nature not being suitable for children but it's up to the parents imo

This for me, good points.

[Northern Monkey]

I watched Robocop when i was about 9,Still not murdered anyone yet.
One film that did actually scare the **** out of me though was Nightmare on Elm Street.I would'nt recommend that to kids,I did'nt sleep properly after that for a good week.
My 3 year old has watched me play Battlefield and he loved it,All the tanks,planes and choppers etc and Call of Duty but he was bored by that.Leave it to parents.

[Northern Monkey]

9wO1Ve34qBA

Currently playing this.Unlocking the double barrel shotgun in mp is a bitch.

[Jessica.]

I don't think the school should have the power to do anything, but it's fair for them to advise it, when GTA V came out a letter was sent out at a local school asking parents not to let their children play it, it was very polite and I'm sure it didn't stop most people. My nephew who attends the school is 10 and he has played GTA, Bioshock and other games with guns/weapons/swearing etc.. and from my experience he is polite and knows the difference between fiction and reality, but unfortunately that's not the case for all children, he has said that some children in his class do act out unsavoury scenes from these games. So my point is, it really depends on whether the child is mature enough and if games effect them. The schools shouldn't have the power to do anything about it, because from my experience every situation is different.

[DemolitionRed]

i played with toy guns as a child and read war comics, watched war movies and cowboy and indian films and so far I have not killed anyone

And my cousin, who was brought up with kid gloves and never allowed toy guns, action man figures or anything that could be deemed as violent, managed to get hold of an air rifle when he was 16 and took a pot shot at someone through his bedroom window. This resulted in armed police surrounding the house whilst my aunty was cooking the Sunday roast and a my cousin (little goodie two shoes) being unceremoniously dragged off to the police station. :)

[user104658]

Eldest daughter played the new tomb raider with me when she was 3. Sorrynotsorry.

[user104658]

5 year olds take on GTA (watching, not playing, her controller dexterity is frankly shameful...)

"What do you think this game is about? "
" You punch people then run away. "
" do you like the game? "
" yeah it's funny! Punch that one! "
" would you ever do that for real? "
" No daddy that's not nice it could hurt someone!! "
" You said it was funny... "
" Daddy! That's just a game! "


Just about sums the whole issue up for me really. Maybe don't let thick kids play games? Most kids are perfectly capable of making the distinction.

I'm not a fan of age ratings in general, I watched a lot of 15 and 18 rated films from around age 8... I despised kids films. Which ironically, I now quite like (both my daughters abandonned "How To Train Your Dragon" and I ended up watching it alone. Same with "Wreck It Ralph" :joker: ).

But my favourites included things like Terminator 2, Total Recall, Robocop, Rambo 1 and 2... You may be beginning to see the 80's action theme... Haha. But yes, anyway. Individuality. Age ratings are arbitrary and nonsensical. Parents shouldn't force their kids to grow up too soon, but nor should they shelter them and try to keep them childlike for as long as possible.

[Mystic Mock]

Well no it's just a Video Game, it's not like it's gonna turn them into a killer is it?

Anything like that happens then it's all down to the parents and the School imo for not teaching the child right from wrong.

[Mystic Mock]

There may have been more to James murder,but,a certain video game played a part that is fact,as for their home lives ,they were no different than thousands of other children,the one came from a broken home,the ones father liked a drink,I know what kids see influences them,I've seen it with my own eyes.I can see nothing wrong with schools pointing out the dangers of some videos.

I bet that even if you asked them seriously on who messed them up they would say it was the parents.

Video Games can make you more immune to violence, but it does not make you a killer, otherwise when I played GTA at age 7 I would've become a killer by now.

[Marsh.]

A video game/horror movie may have inspired Bulger's killers in the some of the details of their crime but they would've committed that crime with or without that movie.

To quote Scream, "Movies don't create psychos, movies make psychos more creative".

If someone's going to commit such acts, they'll do so anyway. A movie or a video game can't and so far hasn't created any mentally unbalanced people from someone who was entirely normal beforehand.

[user104658]

There are precisely two things that can create a ****ed up person. Mental illness, and **** parents. Sometimes a combination of the two. It's hardly ever anything else, there can be other influences, places that messed up people draw inspiration from, but the source of them being messed up in the first place it's a safe bet will simply be down to one of those two things.

Only other realistic cause is severe trauma / post traumatic stress disorders but you could reasonably include those as a form of mental illness.

[Kyle]

If you remove the video games then it becomes the fault of that movie they watched or that tv show they love. Aggressive people existed before technology and aggressive people continue to exist today, now they just have an excuse!

Those kids who grew up in the Middle Ages learned to go crusading from playing Medieval Total War on the PC I tell you.

[Gstar]

18+ Scary movies and games were the main things I was interested in as a child so if that was the case my mum would be on death row or something :laugh:

but no, it's none of the teachers business to report it

[empire]

schools are more interested in you dress code or taking money from your parents for taking you on holiday, and now this silly daft thing, but teachers are not interested in bullying or being tough on pupils bad behaviour, teachers have no real thought of what reality is, or how tough it is in the real world,

[user104658]

schools are more interested in you dress code or taking money from your parents for taking you on holiday, and now this silly daft thing, but teachers are not interested in bullying or being tough on pupils bad behaviour, teachers have no real thought of what reality is, or how tough it is in the real world,
Not only that, they're not particularly interested in academic ability either, so long as all of the kids meet the same generic landmarks designed for "average kids". They're more interested in punishing kids for fidgeting or speaking out of turn, or congratulating little Bobby for knowing what healthy choices to make at lunch time, than in recognising any real achievement.

Obedience and conformity, and being dragged down to the lowest common denominator, that's the name of the game. And then they wonder why our young people aren't excelling.

[Ammi]

schools are more interested in you dress code or taking money from your parents for taking you on holiday, and now this silly daft thing, but teachers are not interested in bullying or being tough on pupils bad behaviour, teachers have no real thought of what reality is, or how tough it is in the real world,

Not only that, they're not particularly interested in academic ability either, so long as all of the kids meet the same generic landmarks designed for "average kids". They're more interested in punishing kids for fidgeting or speaking out of turn, or congratulating little Bobby for knowing what healthy choices to make at lunch time, than in recognising any real achievement.

Obedience and conformity, and being dragged down to the lowest common denominator, that's the name of the game. And then they wonder why our young people aren't excelling.

..that's no different a generalisation against schools as this case is against parents and it's also not accurate..achievements are recognised and children do excel, many children do..but that isn't the first and primary duty of care because a child needs to feel safe/secure and happy in their school environment to do that..schools are certainly not about obedience and conformity but they do teach structure and they do teach rules and boundaries and that's never a bad thing/ a child needs those...maybe your experiences are more negative but if they are then that's something that you should definitely talk to the school about ...

...anyway, in their duty of care there are some things that a school worker would report if a child made a disclosure to them that gave them concerns about the welfare of that child in their family home because it may be that family need some help...but I would say with video/18+ games, there would usually be some other factors of concern about the child as well as them just playing the game..if every school in the country had the same policy as this federation of schools then young people's services wouldn't be able to cope with staffing it and families that do need help wouldn't get it...I agree with those who have said that any possible influence from a video game would depend on many other factors and influences and other balances in the child's life....and it would only be if some of those other things were a concern that it would need to be reported...imo....not to the police though, I'm not sure why the schools are threatening to report it to the police..that would be for other organisations to do if they felt it was applicable....

[Kizzy]

So you're supporting this based on things that may not have happened? Nothing written in the letter suggests that the school's threats are a result of an increase of bad behavior. It's just the schools trying to control everything and you've fallen hook line and sinker for it based purely on an argument that was formed in your own imagination.

I agree with the schools decision, they don't as a rule amend policy on a whim.

“huge pressure” on teachers to report safeguarding concerns, placing them in a no-win situation.'

' This month David Cameron announced that adults in positions of responsibility could face prison sentences of up to five years if they failed to report allegations of neglect or abuse of children.
Department for Education guidance on safeguarding states that all school staff have a responsibility to identify children who are victims or likely to be victims of abuse, and to “take appropriate action, working with other services as needed”.

I'd say due to these comments the new guidelines on safeguarding are what is causing teachers to be so sensitive here, they are worried they could be indirectly be held responsible for any incident and for whatever reason this has been identified as part of a criterion for perceived abuse.
I don't know how this is identified as being a factor unless they ask the kids outright if they play or watch play, if they aren't playing it out.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/mar/29/schools-parents-police-children-18-rated-games

[Ammi]

“It will be construed by many parents as a threat and it is not helpful. If schools want to get the support of parents and gain their confidence, threatening them with social services will not help.”


..I agree with this and there was a spokesperson from the Safeguarding team on TV yesterday..(it might have been BBC/I can't remember..)..saying much the same that what these schools are doing in threatening parents is really unhelpful/a child revealing that they are playing a certain game is not something which the schools should involve themselves in unless there are other factors involved/other disclosures that caused them concerns for the child...I think that the schools/federation or whatever it is, is being very over zealous in their actions, which would do more harm than good in gaining the support of their parents to work with them on aspects of E-safety...

[Kizzy]

I have a feeling this is something to do with the 'troubled families' government initiative, if it's part of a joined up multi-agency approach to safeguarding then it could be one of the tools used?
in that 2 criterion on a checkist have to be identified to trigger intevention, truancy and SENCO identified educational issues being 2 of them also. It seems schools are heavily involved in this process already, I don't think this is an over reaction by the school but a very real threat.
Remember, big brother is watching you...and your kids.

[kirklancaster]

I do not think that this report is merely saying that young kids who watch 18 plus video games will automatically become 'serial killers', but rather that when very young children admit in class that they do play 18 + video games at home as a matter of course, then it does suggest that the parents are guilty of careless neglect at best (if they are unaware) and wilful neglect at worst, (if they are aware), and this just might be an indicator of potentially more grave 'parental neglect'.

There is a growing tendency within society now to overlook the fact that during school-hours, teachers are by necessity, 'parents by proxy', and that - given normal rising and bedtimes for children during weekdays - teachers actually spend LONGER with our kids than we do. This being so; it is a recipe for disaster to impose responsibility for our children on schools without also delegating to them the necessary authority.

Supposing teachers were to discover that an 8 year old was smoking cigarettes at home? Or worse still smoking cannabis or drinking alcohol? Supposing that teachers discovered a 10 year old girl openly boasting of having regular sex in her bedroom with an 18 year old boyfriend while her parents were out or watching TV downstairs?

I agree that the 'ultimatum' could have been worded better but to be fair, I think that schools are increasingly being 'damned if they do' and 'damned if they don't.'

[Cherie]

I do not think that this report is merely saying that young kids who watch 18 plus video games will automatically become 'serial killers', but rather that when very young children admit in class that they do play 18 + video games at home as a matter of course, then it does suggest that the parents are guilty of careless neglect at best (if they are unaware) and wilful neglect at worst, (if they are aware), and this just might be an indicator of potentially more grave 'parental neglect'.

There is a growing tendency within society now to overlook the fact that during school-hours, teachers are by necessity, 'parents by proxy', and that - given normal rising and bedtimes for children during weekdays - teachers actually spend LONGER with our kids than we do. This being so; it is a recipe for disaster to impose responsibility for our children on schools without also delegating to them the necessary authority.

Supposing teachers were to discover that an 8 year old was smoking cigarettes at home? Or worse still smoking cannabis or drinking alcohol? Supposing that teachers discovered a 10 year old girl openly boasting of having regular sex in her bedroom with an 18 year old boyfriend while her parents were out or watching TV downstairs?

I agree that the 'ultimatum' could have been worded better but to be fair, I think that schools are increasingly being 'damned if they do' and 'damned if they don't.'

Great post Kirk

[Ammi]

I do not think that this report is merely saying that young kids who watch 18 plus video games will automatically become 'serial killers', but rather that when very young children admit in class that they do play 18 + video games at home as a matter of course, then it does suggest that the parents are guilty of careless neglect at best (if they are unaware) and wilful neglect at worst, (if they are aware), and this just might be an indicator of potentially more grave 'parental neglect'.

There is a growing tendency within society now to overlook the fact that during school-hours, teachers are by necessity, 'parents by proxy', and that - given normal rising and bedtimes for children during weekdays - teachers actually spend LONGER with our kids than we do. This being so; it is a recipe for disaster to impose responsibility for our children on schools without also delegating to them the necessary authority.

Supposing teachers were to discover that an 8 year old was smoking cigarettes at home? Or worse still smoking cannabis or drinking alcohol? Supposing that teachers discovered a 10 year old girl openly boasting of having regular sex in her bedroom with an 18 year old boyfriend while her parents were out or watching TV downstairs?

I agree that the 'ultimatum' could have been worded better but to be fair, I think that schools are increasingly being 'damned if they do' and 'damned if they don't.'



..you say damned if they do and damned if they don’t but it’s not that at all...it’s about appropriate action if action is needed...and writing to and threatening all parents is neither appropriate nor helpful..all schools are reliant on the trust and support of their parents to work together in a partnership... and how would this happen if the school is threatening to report to the police something which is entirely a parent’s decision ...how is that in the interest of any child...a primary school child playing an 18+ video game..(whether anyone think that’s appropriate or not..)..is not any indication of neglect within the home, there would have to be some other factors involved for that to be the case...

...maybe that child has an older sibling who plays the games and maybe sometimes that sibling lets them have a go..?...maybe it’s the parent’s game and the parent themselves let their child play on it under their supervision..?...maybe they’ve decided..(as the parent..).. that the child is able to cope with that..(because all children are different..)...If a child were to reveal that they played ********** game at home and they thought about death all of the time when they played it..?...then that would be a safeguarding concern...if a child were to be persistently late for school and tired/hungry because their lateness meant that they never had time for breakfast... and they revealed that they hardly ever got sufficient sleep because they were busy playing ************ game every night and really late...?...then that would be a safeguarding concern...and those concerns would require some action from the school and that action would vary depending on the individual situation...in the first instance it may just be to have a chat with the parents..and obviously to discuss a solution...maybe outside organisations would be involved in some situations because it could be that the family does need a bit of help...and that’s what it’s really all about/not punishing..but identifying when help is needed in a family/what the help is and helping that family to get it..parents as a rule in most cases don’t neglect their children/they try their best to parent their children in the best ways they can... but sometimes they can struggle for various reasons....what it isn’t about and what isn’t helpful to anyone involved is to ‘punish’ or to threaten to punish parents ....and I would think also unhelpful to the police who have limited resources...

[lily.]

The voice of reason Ammi... I applaud your post.

[Kizzy]

I really do think it's out of the schools hands and it's more of a government initiative, the schools are getting the flack for it...however all the ifs, buts and maybes are not going to change the fact that schools are being given more responsibility for getting a handle on issues that could manifest into something in higher school.
The police are not an issue as it was social services that are the agency that the families are referred to.

[kirklancaster]

..you say damned if they do and damned if they don’t but it’s not that at all...it’s about appropriate action if action is needed...and writing to and threatening all parents is neither appropriate nor helpful..all schools are reliant on the trust and support of their parents to work together in a partnership... and how would this happen if the school is threatening to report to the police something which is entirely a parent’s decision ...how is that in the interest of any child...a primary school child playing an 18+ video game..(whether anyone think that’s appropriate or not..)..is not any indication of neglect within the home, there would have to be some other factors involved for that to be the case...

...maybe that child has an older sibling who plays the games and maybe sometimes that sibling lets them have a go..?...maybe it’s the parent’s game and the parent themselves let their child play on it under their supervision..?...maybe they’ve decided..(as the parent..).. that the child is able to cope with that..(because all children are different..)...If a child were to reveal that they played ********** game at home and they thought about death all of the time when they played it..?...then that would be a safeguarding concern...if a child were to be persistently late for school and tired/hungry because their lateness meant that they never had time for breakfast... and they revealed that they hardly ever got sufficient sleep because they were busy playing ************ game every night and really late...?...then that would be a safeguarding concern...and those concerns would require some action from the school and that action would vary depending on the individual situation...in the first instance it may just be to have a chat with the parents..and obviously to discuss a solution...maybe outside organisations would be involved in some situations because it could be that the family does need a bit of help...and that’s what it’s really all about/not punishing..but identifying when help is needed in a family/what the help is and helping that family to get it..parents as a rule in most cases don’t neglect their children/they try their best to parent their children in the best ways they can... but sometimes they can struggle for various reasons....what it isn’t about and what isn’t helpful to anyone involved is to ‘punish’ or to threaten to punish parents ....and I would think also unhelpful to the police who have limited resources...

Hi Ammi,

It is not very often I disagree with your views, and this is no exception.

I actually agree with a lot of the points you are raising, but I must point out that you are misinterpreting what I actually wrote. I did say:

"and this just might be an indicator of potentially more grave 'parental neglect'."

As opposed to definitely in all cases.

I am not condemning all parents who let their children access, play or even watch as bystanders the playing of 18 games or films - because with intelligent, mature and responsible parents, their judgement and their personal knowledge of their children is far more credible than any teacher's 'second hand' opinions.

However - not ALL parents are intelligent, mature and responsible, and not all parents care for their kids in the way you claim.

What is an innocuous revelation from one 6 year old regarding playing 18 rated games, may be have far more alarming connotations in another 6 year old revealing the same fact.

I believe that in the case of child neglect or even abuse, it is forgiveable if the schools err on the side of caution.

I would not take offence if I was a parent who allowed my child to watch or play 18 rated games and the school - or even Social Services or Police -contacted me as a 'follow up' to my child revealing as much in school, because I have no fear that in every possible respect, my kids are patently not neglected.

On the other hand, if such an action exposes just one family where neglect or abuse is being perpetrated, and remedial action can be invoked, then I feel the school's actions will be justified.

I do agree that 'contacting the parents' is a far more diplomatic alternative to 'contacting the police' and I did write that the 'ultimatum could have been worded better', but I stand by the points I raised about schools having custody of our children during weekdays for longer than we have, and that 'responsibility' without 'authority' is a recipe for disaster.

[Ammi]

Hi Ammi,

It is not very often I disagree with your views, and this is no exception.

I actually agree with a lot of the points you are raising, but I must point out that you are misinterpreting what I actually wrote. I did say:

"and this just might be an indicator of potentially more grave 'parental neglect'."

As opposed to definitely in all cases.

I am not condemning all parents who let their children access, play or even watch as bystanders the playing of 18 games or films - because with intelligent, mature and responsible parents, their judgement and their personal knowledge of their children is far more credible than any teacher's 'second hand' opinions.

However - not ALL parents are intelligent, mature and responsible, and not all parents care for their kids in the way you claim.

What is an innocuous revelation from one 6 year old regarding playing 18 rated games, may be have far more alarming connotations in another 6 year old revealing the same fact.

I believe that in the case of child neglect or even abuse, it is forgiveable if the schools err on the side of caution.

I would not take offence if I was a parent who allowed my child to watch or play 18 rated games and the school - or even Social Services or Police -contacted me as a 'follow up' to my child revealing as much in school, because I have no fear that in every possible respect, my kids are patently not neglected.

On the other hand, if such an action exposes just one family where neglect or abuse is being perpetrated, and remedial action can be invoked, then I feel the school's actions will be justified.

I do agree that 'contacting the parents' is a far more diplomatic alternative to 'contacting the police' and I did write that the 'ultimatum could have been worded better', but I stand by the points I raised about schools having custody of our children during weekdays for longer than we have, and that 'responsibility' without 'authority' is a recipe for disaster.

..I respect your opinion, Kirk and identifying children at risk is obviously very important in schools as children can often make disclosures to school staff and those disclosures will always be acted on, appropriately to each individual case ...with neglect for instance, I can't see that a child revealing that they have played a particular video game is any sign of neglect on it's own so there would have to be some other factors involved...it's doubtful for instance that a child who is bright and alert in lessons, fully attentive, has a healthy diet, always on time for classes/happy and relaxed at school/socialises well with peers etc etc etc...but reveals they have played a certain game is suffering any neglect in their home so maybe just mentioning what they have said to their parents in case they weren't aware of it..?...


...I think with parents, we just see things differently/and will agree to differ with this...for school staff the priority concern is always for the child..that a child is safe, that they are confident, that they are happy/anxiety free...to help raise their self esteem so they can reach their potentials etc...for this it's important that we also work alongside the parents/trust from parents as well as from children is extremely important..we're not there to judge them or their parenting skills/decisions....and I don't think of parents as good or bad or not intelligent or not mature as such because most parents are really trying their best...but more that some may struggle and need help from outside organisations..to help them reach their potential as parents, maybe you could say....