Should parents be allowed to Microchip their kids?

[Shadowferal]

Up to the parents...
What happens after a child finally hits 16-18...is up to him/her.

[Rukario]

I can see why you would want something like that if you fear a child might be kidnapped but if it became common place kidnappers would just learn to remove it...
If you want that for any other reason you are just a bad parent imo.

[Raone]

You were doing great there until you lept right through consent and adult choice.

Make it so if the children have it the parents also have to have it, and you got yourself a deal! So when you try to go to the washroom in peace the child knows where your hiding and can bang on the door immediately to get in.

[Shadowferal]

Child...Constitutional
Parent...unconstitutional

[cubby]

Make it so if the children have it the parents also have to have it, and you got yourself a deal! So when you try to go to the washroom in peace the child knows where your hiding and can bang on the door immediately to get in.

That already automatically happens - parents don't need chips for that.

[Hilhen7]

Make it so if the children have it the parents also have to have it, and you got yourself a deal! So when you try to go to the washroom in peace the child knows where your hiding and can bang on the door immediately to get in.

That's a good point. Also if the child can track you it would help lost children find their home.

Also tracking devices for spouses will help prevent / stop affairs.

[cubby]

Child...Constitutional
Parent...unconstitutional

I think people are casting aside their normally logical arguments because of some viscerally emotional response to this idea. So far the only argument I've heard that is even remotely logical is possible hackers. And that's far fetched.

- - - Updated - - -

That's a good point. Also if the child can track you it would help lost children find their home.

No, it's not even remotely close to a good point. It's a funny point, sure. But good? Not so much.

[Shadowferal]

I think people are casting aside their normally logical arguments because of some viscerally emotional response to this idea. So far the only argument I've heard that is even remotely logical is possible hackers. And that's far fetched.

Yeah, if it's just a chip that pings, then it's nothing more than a locator. And I see little harm in a child having such a thing.

[Hilhen7]

I think people are casting aside their normally logical arguments because of some viscerally emotional response to this idea. So far the only argument I've heard that is even remotely logical is possible hackers. And that's far fetched.

Well logically what's good for one group should be good if applied to another group. If you want something done to someone else but wouldn't want it done to yourself something could be wrong.

[Antiganon]

1) Children have rights, the same as adults.
2) Those rights are held in trust by the parents/legal guardians until the children either reach the age of majority or undertake legal emancipation procedures.
3) Parents have a legal responsibility for their children's safety.
4) Parents have a legal responsibility for their children's actions (in most cases).

Should it be legal? Absolutely. Find me a compelling reason why it shouldn't be legal.

Should people do it? Debatable. As of right now, I would not chip my kids. They are also both under 3, go nowhere on their own, and they go to a preschool with their Nana as the director, an aunt as a teacher, and numerous family friends on staff. Were I to move across the country and be forced to send my kids to a preschool where I know literally no one, my opinion might be different. Were I to live in the area where my wife and I lived before we had kids, I would absolutely chip them, as there were numerous break ins (and several abductions) in that area.

To those saying "oh just put the chip in their backpack/clothes/shoes/phone/watch" - you are sadly deluded.

Kidnappers will remove a kidnapped kid's clothing, shoes, and belongings at the earliest possible opportunity. Trackers in the shoes are completely useless when the shoes are in the garbage can outside the store your kid was abducted from. Not to mention the possibility of your kid losing/forgetting/"forgetting" the thing with the chip in it.

Basically, like most situations where parental conduct is being questioned (by those who are almost invariably not parents) the decision is best left up to the family to decide what is best in their specific situation.

[Noradin]

Could you link the verbage from the European countries that would ban it?

You mean link you articles 1 and 2 of the German constitution, article 10 of the Swiss one and the childrens rights part of the European Convention on Human rights?
Sure, but what purpose would that serve? You can look them up with the information given and you would need to look up the definitions of he words used and comments on what they mean in context anyway.
Also, keep in mind these countries use civil law systems und thus the articles will probably seem wage to someone used to common law--at least that is a common complaint from citizens of the US and the UK.

Regarding US law: I'm not interested in the details (anymore) and I'm not fond of common law and all the other things like plea deals and juries, the possibility to have cases against inanimate objetcs to circumvent the rights of their owners, or how they handle the possible crimes by minors in court. I think it is a mess in dire need of reforms that I do not want to touch with a ten foot pole. In my opinion the system is set up to generate profit for the professionals and justice is secondary to that.
Thus, you will not see me quoting US law in any detail. It goes by precedence anyway and I do not have time to look up all possible cases that might be related and rate them.

--

Another point I wish to rise is that I think such implants are more of a security risk than not having them is.
If they are to be effective then they must be registered somewhere and it must be possible to pinpoint their location somehow and it will be possible to block them.
They might helpto identify a body, or to prevent an diletantic attempt to hide a child under a new identity, but on the other hand they would make it easier to plan and carry out targeted kidnappings and would lead to possible additional harm to the kid in an attempt to disable them after the child is caught.

[Hilhen7]

To those saying "oh just put the chip in their backpack/clothes/shoes/phone/watch" - you are sadly deluded.

Kidnappers will remove a kidnapped kid's clothing, shoes, and belongings at the earliest possible opportunity. Trackers in the shoes are completely useless when the shoes are in the garbage can outside the store your kid was abducted from. Not to mention the possibility of your kid losing/forgetting/"forgetting" the thing with the chip in it.

Basically, like most situations where parental conduct is being questioned (by those who are almost invariably not parents) the decision is best left up to the family to decide what is best in their specific situation.

If this becomes common practice the kidnappers would also have knowledge that this is being done. Thus a chip inserted in the child may lead to kidnappers just removing the chip, perhaps causing harm to the child in the process.

[cubby]

Well logically what's good for one group should be good if applied to another group. If you want something done to someone else but wouldn't want it done to yourself something could be wrong.

You're using logic only about half way - Kant and the Golden Rule are great, but not when it comes to children. You're just posting generic stuff, without any real arguments in favor. I want to discuss this with you in more detail, but I fear that this is how you'll respond.

[rayden54]

I think people are casting aside their normally logical arguments because of some viscerally emotional response to this idea. So far the only argument I've heard that is even remotely logical is possible hackers. And that's far fetched.

No. That's incredibly likely. Heck, half the country's social security numbers got hacked.

Actually though mass hacking is less likely than your friend/neighbor/family member (as in the people most likely to want to kidnap a kid) sneaking a peak at the parent's phone when they're not looking.

The other thing though is there's no real benefit. As soon as it becomes common, kidnappers will cut the chips outta the kids.

[Hilhen7]

The other thing though is there's no real benefit. As soon as it becomes common, kidnappers will cut the chips outta the kids.

Bingo. Such devices only work if no one knows about them.

[Noradin]

This is just a tracker, so if you kid gets lost/kidnapped/whatever, you know where they are.

Yes, and so will potential kidnappers.
They can stalk the kid from afar and then catch it because they can know exactly where to find it.
Then they will block or remove it--kind of the same way having money on a chip at the tip of your finger does not make theft of your money impossible, it just means they will take your finger instead of your wallet if they are desperate enough.

[Raone]

No, it's not even remotely close to a good point. It's a funny point, sure. But good? Not so much.

Not true, I did make a joke from it but if a child did get lost in like a grocery store or parking lot or somewhere else and the parent/adult didn't realise it yet, he/she could use his/her tracker to find his/her parents instead of getting more lost or wandering somewhere they shouldn't. I feel if anything you do to a child should be also okay to an adult, if there was a rule that if you chip a child then you have to be chipped yourself I actually would be totally okay with it, I still wouldn't do it though

Also the biggest thing from this that nobody is thinking about is the possible emotional damage this could do to a child who knows there is a chip in their body. Most kids will probably be perfectly fine with it but some it may mess with their heads causing them to do possible self mutilation. I know if I had a chip in my arm as a child it would freak me out constantly. I never did anything wrong as a kid but just the idea of having it in my arm freaks me out right now sitting here. I know there is some kids who will take it as a "big gov is watching me all the time" mental breakdown. This is something we can't really discuss though because there is no way to know unless studies happen.

Also do you tell your child? Not telling them could cause serious trust issues in the future and cause them to act out the moment you remove it but also telling them could cause other trust issues as in the child thinking their parents have 0 faith in me that is why they are tracking me. Also we all know teenagers, they don't think past what is happening now, they won't care that your doing it make sure they are safe they will ONLY think its you don't trust them at all and they will resent you for it possibly damaging your relationship with them.

Again all stuff that can't really be discussed/proven without studies.

[Antiganon]

Well logically what's good for one group should be good if applied to another group. If you want something done to someone else but wouldn't want it done to yourself something could be wrong.

That is absolutely not logic.

Milk is good for children, because they are growing, and need calcium for strong bones.

Clearly, milk is good for everyone, and should be forcibly given at every meal, regardless of whether or not you are lactose-intolerant, vegan, deathly afraid of cows, etc.

In this case, a chip could be helpful for lost or abducted children, as they are actively being searched for by their parents, and are generally not so great at finding their own way home from wherever they might have gotten to.

If my wife was kidnapped and left in a shopping mall in a city she has never been to, she could read signs to find out where she is, read a map to find out where she needs to go, and communicate effectively with people she met along the way to try to get there.

If my 2 year old son was kidnapped and left in a shopping mall in a city he has never been to, he would sit on the floor crying inconsolably until my wife or I arrived. He would probably vomit on himself, as he has a tendency to do so when extremely upset. He would probably be brought to a local hospital by whatever mall security (lol) person found him. He would probably be listed as John Doe on a list of missing children, while he knows his name (first, middle, and last name!), he is not fond of sharing it with people he doesn't know. He would probably become a ward of the state wherever he is found. I may or may not ever find him, largely dependent on how the random strangers who find him handle the situation.

But yeah, chipping kids with parent's consent and chipping parents by the government because reasons is totes the same.

[cubby]

You mean link you articles 1 and 2 of the German constitution, article 10 of the Swiss one and the childrens rights part of the European Convention on Human rights?
Sure, but what purpose would that serve? You can look them up with the information given and you would need to look up the definitions of he words used and comments on what they mean in context anyway.
Also, keep in mind these countries use civil law systems und thus the articles will probably seem wage to someone used to common law--at least that is a common complaint from citizens of the US and the UK.

Yep - that's what I mean. Thanks. All of those are from a constitution written before this was available. So it comes down to, as always, what the court rules them to mean - if I understand German and Swiss law.

I'm assuming that children don't have a lot of consent rights when they are born, even in Europe. So that means it's the parents decision, with some exceptions regarding illegality, of course.

This chip is legal, non-invasive, and only helps without any harm. Parents can consent to surgery, right? Same thing.

Regarding US law: I'm not interested in the details (anymore) and I'm not fond of common law and all the other things like plea deals and juries, the possibility to have cases against inanimate objetcs to circumvent the rights of their owners, or how they handle the possible crimes by minors in court. I think it is a mess in dire need of reforms that I do not want to touch with a ten foot pole. In my opinion the system is set up to generate profit for the professionals and justice is secondary to that.
Thus, you will not see me quoting US law in any detail. It goes by precedence anyway and I do not have time to look up all possible cases that might be related and rate them.

You won't find any on this topic - I'm an American lawyer and this issue is not even remotely ripe.

Another point I wish to rise is that I think such implants are more of a security risk than not having them is.
If they are to be effective then they must be registered somewhere and it must be possible to pinpoint their location somehow and it will be possible to block them.
They might helpto identify a body, or to prevent an diletantic attempt to hide a child under a new identity, but on the other hand they would make it easier to plan and carry out targeted kidnappings and would lead to possible additional harm to the kid in an attempt to disable them after the child is caught.

You're assuming things that are not in the article. You lept passed the conversation, made generalizations about the tech that may or may not be correct, and the dismissed the entire premise based off of those assumptions.

Not a good way to argue, in any country.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, and so will potential kidnappers.
They can stalk the kid from afar and then catch it because they can know exactly where to find it.
Then they will block or remove it--kind of the same way having money on a chip at the tip of your finger does not make theft of your money impossible, it just means they will take your finger instead of your wallet if they are desperate enough.

No. You're just making shit up now, because there is no logical argument against chipping kids.

[Shadowferal]

Bingo. Such devices only work if no one knows about them.

Hmf...more likely that kidnappers won't bother with a chipped child..