Yes exactly

I subscribe to a different style of parenting to that described by Merc, and that works too. If you show trust, respect and honesty, kids will live up to it and return it. But it takes guts to cut the leash the first time, same as when you let them try the fireman's pole for the first time. You still watch them of course, and you're there to make sure it's not fatal, kiss them better, take them to hospital, but they perform the act without your safety net. I'd rather they did that when I was watching than behind my back or going crazy once they're out of my control.

My father tried the no privacy way. He never sees his grand-children.

There is not just one correct way, but there are people who are too pig-headed to consider that theirs is not the only way.

I'm done with this.

Oh and Ibram....

haha -that's how I feel about my kids which is why they're not nome-schooled. I thought iId read you were, but I guess with lots of chopping and changing it's effectively the same thing.

Nine schools? Pah! Well Pah-ish. On counting, I only went to eight. But it felt like at least ten. My record was half a day in one school. And one day in another. And no, I did not get expelled from either.....

From what I saw in college, where there were a great number of test subjects, the over-protected kids went in two ways when left to their own devices.

Half of them were very timid and missed out on fun. The harmful sort and the harmless sort too.

The other half went hog-wild, and skipped the harmless fun and went directly to the wildest craziest stuff they could find.

Could be that the biggest mistake is buying them their own system. If there's only the one "community" station, they learn the importance of sharing (which they probably won't truly learn until they have their own children) and the parent has a means of monitoring their activity without being too terribly intrusive.

Hi Cloud!

I'm deliberately ignoring the shouting match over there... They have a good question, but I don't feel like getting into a fight right now.

But I do have some thoughts and suggestions for your question. How old? Well, there is no hard/fast rule of course. It's like all other child development milestones. I know that's no answer for you, so try this.

Get the email address. Get it with some name that they'll like, but which has no real bearing on their identity in real life. But consider the email address *your* email address, that they get to *use*. Do the youngsters live with you? Do you have physical control over their access to the email account? That would greatly simplify things.

Assuming you do have such control, I would explain to the child what an email address is, what it's used for, what it's *not* used for, and especially that I would be sharing it with them. Help them understand that you'll be able to see all the messages, in and out, and that you're letting them practice, helping them learn how to use it. The nice thing about a free email address is that it can be considered disposable, like a diaper. If it gets covered in crap, toss it. Until then it can be quite serviceable and cheap.

I haven't really answered your question about age, though, I know. I think early exposure to the technology is a good thing. But it must be done responsibly, and that's the reason for the little lecture above. It really isn't an age thing. If they're sufficiently mature to drive a computer, and make phone calls, then email is a reasonable expansion/combination of those two aspects of modern life. A youngster today will have far more such interactions than you or I will, and early exposure can lead to early fluency and early mastery.

I read somewhere that there are two classes of internet citizens, immigrants and natives. I am an immigrant. I come from the old country of bound books and pencil and paper arithmetic. Hand penned letters and busy signals on telephones. I've made my way to the digital shore and I'm flourishing here. I love this new country, and although I still have fond memories and some of the habits of the old country, there is no going back.

The kids in your life and in mine, however, are natives. They were born digital. Their future is digital. My acceptance of that fact helps me do a better job at understanding the world they'll inhabit as they grow. Denying that fact does a disservice to both parties. As a parent, as a responsible adult model for all the young people who are observing me and taking notes, I strive to engage these new technologies, not shun them.

As I help them learn (and learn myself) I'm acutely aware that mistakes will be made. I'm not afraid of mistakes, and a good thing, since they're so common and unavoidable to boot. But I am aware that my response to the mistakes is more important, and that's what I want to convey to the kid when teaching them about email. I agree that the stakes are higher now than when I was a kid. I had to worry about prank calls (or worry about getting caught making prank calls). Now there's cyber bullying, stalking, identity theft, child porn and online predators. Now that I think about it, maybe we should just chuck all these damn computers into the sea... maybe not. But that's all the more reason to *teach* them about how to use it.

And my teaching style is hands on. Try it. Use it. Ask about it. Ask them about it. Make mistakes. Correct the mistakes. But I don't believe I can protect them adequately indefinitely. Better they should learn how to keep themselves safe. You taught them how to cross the street safely, didn't you? And the stakes are certainly high with little kids in traffic... Same thing here. Hold their hand. Stop look and listen. Cross safely. Welcome to the digital shore.

Thank you, Big V, for your thoughtful post. You make some really good points here!

No, they are not my children and don't live with me. That doesn't absolve me, as a grandmother, of needing to watch over them!

You're welcome, and thank you for the kind remarks.

Of course you still have some responsibility for watching over them. But even though you're not in the house with them, you can still share an email address as I described above. Your ability to handhold them for all the other computer-y stuff is not easily done, but if you get some webmail kind of email address, say, gmail.com, there's no reason you can't set it up, give them the login, and share away. You still get to communicate with them via email, you still get to monitor what's being sent and received, and you still get to let them practice. Pretty good situation. I'd get the parents' input on it too, since they're a key factor in making it all work. With their buy in, you can accomplish much from a distance. Like demonstrating to your g-kids that that distance can be overcome with some tools, like email. All is not lost. You're all bound for the same shore, but you might be on different boats. Keep trying and keep us informed.

I don't look at the net as the same thing as searching their room. I will not search his room, back-pack, etc unless I feel I've seen some behavior or evidence that leads me to think I need to. And then, only after a conversation that leads me to think he is lying to me, based on the information.

The net is outside of my home and the ability for me to make those kinds of decisions. I cannot see who he is bringing in and out of his room, how old they are, how much time they are spending together, spend some time with them myself (which will happen) and what they seem like. I cannot call him on his cell and ask where he is and have him hold it up so I can listen, I cannot check the GPS on his phone/bracelet/car to see where he is surfing outside of my home.

Within his home he can feel safe and secure and trusted, his sanctuary, even from the way others treat him. That is why we treat him with respect and are polite to him. The golden rule applies in our home. We do not say "because we said so" ever. It is a cop-out and cheap and causes a loss of respect. Do as I say and not as I do is for the lazy.
Within that sanctuary, his room should be a sanctuary from us, HIS place, and we do not enter unless we knock and that will continue permanent.

That terminal being in the home does not mean what happens on that screen is... it is not and should never be treated as such.
Those who feel that the net is not "real life" are fools on this topic and need to read more. Every single person who they are speaking to is a real person, every word typed is a real thought. Sadly, all too often, not by whom they say they are and for the wrong reasons.
Too many in every town know that young people need ego affirmation and are sexually charged. By using the latter to give them the former is a quick and sick way to get them to trust them and meet them, then to give them what they want from them, harming them permanently in a way that is so deep that I will speak of it no more, but to say that I know of it.
The WORST part of this is that the smarter your kid is, the faster and better this works on them.
That it is treated so causally by the young due to it's ease means it should be watched for their safety and nothing else. It is out of love and caring... not out of some militant form of desire for control.
Merc is the worst possible voice for this point of view.

HUGE Assumption. Huge.

"militant desire for control" is not something I ever mentioned. There is nothing militant about it. Except from the view of a few minors on here who have no parenting experience.

Merc, again and again you show your biases, your prejudices, and each of them tells me to feel sorry for your children.

Why can't you get it through your thick skull that just because someone's younger than you doesn't mean they arent a good deal smarter?

Because you consistently prove to me by your posts that you are like any other 16 year old I have met on-line or otherwise, and having been through three of my own, combined with the fact that you have no parenting or true life experience yet, that your comments reinforce that notion.

There are plenty of very smart people younger than me, none of them are minor children or teens.

Aaaaand he does it again. Nothing but prejudice, bias, and ageism from merc.

The two statements were separate. The first was not about you. Though I can see how it seemed that way.
The reason I stated the second is because you are behaving like a bigoted jerk.

The truth hurst doesn't it.

Bigoted to whom?