Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Rights and Liberties

Spying Parents: When Worrying Becomes Stalking

By Ellen Goodman, Washington Post Writers Group. Posted November 9, 2007.


New technologies are allowing parents to take watching their children to creepy, new heights.
Advertisement

Pretty soon, we're going have to amend the favorite mom and dad moniker of the moment. Those much vaunted helicopter parents are turning into black-helicopter parents. The image of parents hovering over their kids is morphing into the darker image of parents spying on their kids.

Here is the latest bit of high-tech surveillance equipment being marketed to parents. A company inauspiciously named Bladerunner has begun selling a jacket with a GPS device sewn into the lining. For a mere $500 plus $20 a month, a parent can track a child, or at least his jacket, all day long.

This is a just small addition to the family-friendly arsenal. We already have a full range of cell phones equipped with GPS. Indeed, the most common cell phone greeting is not "how are you?" but "where are you?" Parents are being sold the idea that they can trust but Wherify -- the name of one among the many manufacturers offering services that beam your kids' whereabouts to your cell phone.

Want to monitor what your kids eat at school? MyNutriKids gives you the scoop from the lunchroom. Want an automatic alert if he got a B on the pop quiz? Go to GradeSpeed. Want to monitor her instant messages? There's IMSafer. And want to know if your 17-year-old is speeding? Alltrack not only tells you but lets you remotely flash the lights and honk the horn till she slows down.

There is also a "safety checks" service courtesy of Sprint to let you know if your kids showed up at soccer practice. And a "geofencing" service from Verizon that alerts parents if a child leaves the area circumscribed by her parents.

Next thing you know, there will be a chip implanted under your child's skin. No wait! Somebody's already invented that.

Once upon a time -- that ever-popular era -- a parent had two weapons for keeping kids out of danger: They kept their mouths open and their fingers crossed. Once upon that time, the second set of ears and eyes on children were those of neighbors.

Now we have a disharmonic convergence of anxieties, the dual fear that kids are endangered and/or dangerous, out of (our) control. There's the sense that we are raising children in a more treacherous culture. We teach preschoolers about stranger-danger, and only let them take candy from our friends if it's sealed. But even if kids aren't wandering in the neighborhood, they are wandering in the Internet with all of its unknown cul-de-sacs. What teenagers claim as MySpace, parents often see as an unmonitored public zone that leads predators to their doorstep.

At the same time, parents are expected to know and control everything their kids watch, eat, do -- where they are, who they are texting, what channels and Web sites they are viewing. So we have entered a technological arms race where even MySpace -- whose space? -- offers parents a way to track the changes posted by children.

"The culture of fear," according to Danah Boyd, a fellow at Harvard's Berkman Center for Internet and Society, "says that if you are not monitoring, you are a bad parent. Apparently, we're supposed to be stalking our kids." Having privatized child raising, we seem to be turning parents into private eyes.

I am by no means blasé about danger. The implicit deal that comes with the cell phone is that kids get to roam and parents get to stay in touch. It's a mutual comfort society. But the downside to what MIT's Sherry Turkle calls "tethered adolescents" is real: "There's always a parent on speed dial." Teens are never really on their own. We may be protecting them right out of the ability to make their own decisions. Including their own mistakes.

It's not clear that a surveillance society actually provides more security. Consider the ubiquitous surveillance cameras at schools. What did they do for that Cleveland high school last month except to leave behind chilling, post-mortem pictures of the 14-year-old shooter? And how easy is it to drop the GPS jacket by the roadside?

Meanwhile, we may be raising a generation with low expectations of public privacy, trained by Big Mother to accept Big Brother. Did anyone notice how Lindsay Lohan and Paris Hilton made monitoring anklets into this year's fashion accessory?

As someone who has done my fair share of speed dialing, I am a believer in the text messaging and cell phoning that keeps parents and kids in contact. But there's a moment when the two-way tools of communication turn into the one-way tools of surveillance. Then the tether becomes a leash and parenting becomes stalking. We don't talk; we track. That's when it's time to say, Black Helicopter down.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: surveillance, technology, parenting

Ellen Goodman is a member of the Washington Post Writers Group.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Rights and Liberties! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
ah, the brave new world order
Posted by: talkville on Nov 9, 2007 1:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Already a generation is being accomodated to 'adjust' to the new world order conditions by means of paranoia, schizophrenia or most likely the fine-tuned tension and oscillation between the two. The authority of "zero tolerance", "zero privacy" and just "loving them to death"! Now technologies are so advanced and multifarious and permeate even the air we breathe that even Big Brother is showing signs of Being Watched and being Cared For.

Move over detectives, Private Eye's in town, YouTube's hungry, and make absolutely sure of what you're doing if you Google your neighbor!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» HOLY BIG BROTHER, BATMAN! Posted by: Artkansas
» RE: HOLY BIG BROTHER, BATMAN! Posted by: talkville
Shoot low, sherrif, they're ridin' Shetlands!
Posted by: finnsagain on Nov 9, 2007 3:32 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This pearl-clutching piece would be funny if it weren't so sickening. The NYT, along with other major media, stood by silently, until very recently, as our Constitution was shredded by the Bush administration. Now we get a piece decrying the monitoring of children by parents? Wow, how brave and like, cutting edge! Children need monitoring. The electronic age demands it. I know of parents whose teenagers have run up huge online gambling debt, who're making text-message drug deals, who're getting involved in online porn and the predators who inhabit those dark regions. Any parent not willing to forget privacy and watch out for their kids is a fool.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's just easier
Posted by: davy on Nov 9, 2007 3:48 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why on earth would you want to take the time and (yawn) the energy to love and communicate with your child when you can simply spy on them. It's becoming the American way.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Replacing Mom's evil eye with electronic ones.
Posted by: kepstein7777 on Nov 9, 2007 4:24 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Back when I was a kid, Mom knew you done somethin' wrong just by lookin' at ya when you got home. Our moms didn't need no newfangled gadgets to see when we was up to no good.

Pretty soon, there will be temperature-sensitive cell phones that can knit a sweater and make you put it on.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

ok for toddlers
Posted by: bannelee on Nov 9, 2007 4:55 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can actually see it for toddlers.When my kids were little i always kept my eyes on them,but still worried about kidnappers.However,once they're old enough to care,they're too old for this.With no trust,you get sneakier kids.Period.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ok for toddlers Posted by: Macavity
» Trust breeds trust Posted by: Cathyc
Not to mention that parents are financially
Posted by: lwbaby on Nov 9, 2007 5:24 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
liable for the actions and debts of their kids.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I have yet to read the article....
Posted by: momly on Nov 9, 2007 5:59 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...and will do so in a moment, but my gut reaction to the lead is to say that parents (especially of teenagers of which I am one) will use the electronic devices to keep an eye on our kids because we don't know who else is out there doing the exact same thing.

I would rather be accused of spying on my daughter - which I will own up to that I do - than be blindsided by her rape, abduction, or whatever the hell else could happen to her at the hands of another "adult" out there.

It is a different world and the electronic assets that allow kids to keep in touch with one another have a dark purpose to those who will use them in such a manner. So, I, as her mother, will use them to keep an eye on the strangers that she encounters. I'd rather be a big ugly guard dog watching out for her interests than sit here on my couch and let her walk into the unknown without some sort of back up.

If that makes me horrible, then I am horrible. And my daughter is alive and well.

Okay, now I'll go read the article and see how much of my comment will need to be retracted.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Romantic Violence
Posted by: Romantic Violence on Nov 9, 2007 6:00 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This kind of nonsense is just setting the acceptable social and political climate to have the govern-ment monitor us all as children.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: omantic Violence Posted by: momly
How are they going to learn to live?
Posted by: goeswithness on Nov 9, 2007 7:25 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First of all, let's be realistic: my friend the child sex-abuse therapist tells me that your child is still thousands of times more likely to be hurt by somebody YOU trust than someone you don't know. Okay, now that we're grounded...

It seems to me that parents treat teenagers as adults in all the wrong ways - the kids have jobs, cars, TVs and computers in their bedrooms, have few responsibilities at home, no supervision, and then the parents don't trust them with those things! Of course it's more responsibility than most of them can handle - so why is it allowed? I'm afraid it comes down to parents doing the easiest thing for themselves, parenting from afar, instead of teaching them how to be adults and giving them the freedom they can handle as they grow.

It just seems bass-ackwards to me. My parents didn't buy me a lot of stuff or let me run around a lot in high school, but they did make me handle my own business. When I went to college, I was considered an adult. I worked at a university last year and I was appalled at how a student has the slightest snag, and you find yourself on the phone with mommy or daddy! Just when are these young adults going to be trusted with their own lives and decisions?

I think Ms. Goodman's asking some very good questions about 1) whether kids who are brought up with these surveillance methods ever learn to make good decisions on their own because of awareness of consequences, instead of just doing whatever they can get away with until somebody stops them, and 2) whether they WILL accept surveillance in their lives, from sources benevolent or malevolent, thinking that it's normal.

Scary as hell.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Children learn by EXAMPLE! Posted by: Cathyc
WE'VE TURNED THE CHILDREN INTO PRISONERS
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Nov 9, 2007 7:56 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If I were young today, I know I'd run away. If parents raised a child today the way I was raised, they'd be sent to jail. Letting children find their way by allowing some freedom is not neglect. Yet I see what happens today and I understand why parents are scared. Strange how we can monitor a child in the next room and then some SOB decides to send them off to fight a war. Cheap shot but I couldn't resist it. Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Initiating the New Citizens
Posted by: undrgrndgirl on Nov 9, 2007 9:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Spying under the guise of "protecting the children" lies at the heart of the corporate need for workers who are indoctrinated into and accept complete abandonment of personal privacy. Children who are drug tested and spied on by their parents and schools will readily accept the same when they are drug tested and spied on by their employers and/or governments. Watch THX-1138 you'll get the idea...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Whatever happened to trust?
Posted by: qoppermeg on Nov 9, 2007 11:37 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Okay, parents are right to try and protect their children, I agree. A parent's job is to foster growth in their child, and help them when they need it-- not shelter them from every single thing in the world.
We all go through difficult things, and it is how our parents RAISED us that will most likely determine the actions we make.

And what this all really comes down to is trust. If you don't trust your child, your child is certainly never going to trust you. Just think of how your kid would feel if they found out you were spying on them. As a young adult myself (with no kids) I realize I'm coming from a different perspective than a parent would, but really... do you think your kids would appreciate your spying on them?
If you open yourself to communication, and involve the child in your life and vice versa, you can help them become good decision makers. And if they screw up, hopefully they have someone they can trust to go to, and maybe that person will be you, but maybe not.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Whatever happened to trust? Posted by: joejoejoe
Maybe I don't get it
Posted by: LindaB on Nov 9, 2007 1:58 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
but I don't understand why the debate here has divided along a line of "we don't trust our kids so we spy on them" vs "if we don't trust our kids they'll become little monsters."

I'll be the first to agree that spying on your kids is not good form. If your teenager catches you reading her diary (or whatever the modern equivalent is), she'll hate you and be sneakier. I get that. But since when is trying to keep "an eye" on your kids' whereabouts the same as reading a diary? If my daughter got kidnapped, I'd sure wish she had freaking GPS tracking. I'm not talking about monitoring her every move 24 hours a day, I'm talking about installing safeguards that can be used IF NEEDED.

Another thing that strikes me is that most people here seem to assume that you'd be doing this without your kids knowing, or at least without their input. Not me. I'd be telling mine: "Honey, please keep this with you. If anything happens to you, I need to know how to find you." And she would do it, because I HAVE earned her trust by NOT reading her diary.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Maybe I don't get it Posted by: LindaB
» RE: Maybe I don't get it Posted by: momly
» RE: Maybe I don't get it Posted by: LindaB
Hyterical article that can only be looked at as hyterical
Posted by: joejoejoe on Nov 9, 2007 4:41 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ellen you are right I shouldn't be concerned if my kid is driving 80 in a 20 mph zone...I shouldn't be concerned if my kid is texting the stoner kid living on the next block...I shouldn't be concerned if my kid is out joyriding 50 miles away when he was supposed to be at the library...of course I shouldn't be concerned about these things because kids (and teenagers especially) only do what their parents tell them to do...at least kids who have focused, well meaning, involved, educated parents, non-black helicopter parents...duh!

It is time Ellen Goodman to wake up. Putting aside all of the obvious safety benefits of these technologies and piece of mind they provide for parents. This technology offers logical access to the totally illogical reality that children live in. I

f my parents had this type of technology it would have only benefited me.

I can only imagine that Ellen Goodman either has no children or children that never did anything wrong, got a 4.0 and are now attending Harvard.

P.S. Thanks for the product info -

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Back in the day m.
Posted by: lwbaby on Nov 9, 2007 8:00 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Neighbors looked out for each others kids. Not anymore, everyone is at work so they can afford homes with master baths, vacations and Wiis.

Especially in surburban neighborhoods where everyone is pursuing careers.

Ellen wants to know why neighbors aren't looking out for the kids anymore? They're all at work.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Back in the day m. Posted by: fork
mommy government
Posted by: karyse on Nov 10, 2007 7:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
At some point we ceased to have a goverment run by and for adults and changed over to the mommy government where adult citizens are treated exactly the same way that parents (in particular, mommies) treat their young children.

Can you say totalitarian? Can you say authoritarian?

The mechanism that allowed this change was EXACTLY a conflation between ideas about child raising and ideas about governmental responsibility for its citizens. Look at the apparantly innocuous seat-belt law. For the life of me I can't fathom how anyone accepts that the police/state has a responsibility/duty/right to force a citizen to wear one; UNLESS we are, and accept that we are, children in need of protection based upon the fact that we do not have the ability to make our own decisions about our own lives.

Does it surprise anyone that mommies behave like mommies?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The creepiness factor comes from third party involvement
Posted by: terihu on Nov 10, 2007 7:51 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What the protective parents in the comments seem to be missing in the article was that there are third parties offering to HELP parents keep track of their kids.

Give your kid a cell phone, fine. Have them call you when they go to a friend's house, fine. Call them seven times an hour, fine. But to have the PHONE COMPANY send you an alert when they arrive at their destination? That's weird. That's big-brotherish. That's creepy.

And regardless of whether the kid knows about it or not, it's not good for the kid. KIDS should take responsibility for notifying parents of their whereabouts. If they forget to call...or lie about it and are then caught...they take the consequences and LEARN from them. This kind of surveillance means that the kid will not take responsibilty or learn...stuff just magically happens.

I have kids, I keep in regular phone contact with them. I would NOT want Sprint to tell me where they are. It's none of Sprint's business. They're MY kids, it's MY business.

And here's one uber-creepy consideration for you complacent parents out there:

Suppose your kid is LESS careful about where they go and who they go with because "oh, that GPS in my jacket will let mom know where I am, so I don't have to worry about it." That possibility gives me the chills.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

pdennany
Posted by: Pop on Nov 14, 2007 4:15 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is important that parents do the parenting. Everyone else butt out!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

All Night, All Day, Technology Watches Over Me
Posted by: penobscotdziekuje@yahoo.com on Nov 15, 2007 1:04 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There's no escaping the latest gadgets designed to watch over everything that moves. No matter where a human goes, someone or something is following YOU. Hardly any place in space or time is void without a camera. There's a camera in my company's lunchroom. Many people bristled at the idea of placing a camera in this refuge.
In these times of terrorism and other unfortunate acts of civil disobedience, parents are nervous after their children are dropped off at school or some public place where they could be harmed. So some think by giving them a piece of a technological device would be a key component to arm them. There has to be a better way to ensure safety of children. But is technology the best way to do this?
We have "safe houses" and after-school recreation center programs to watch kids, and I like this concept. Those don't require so much technology. Because nowadays both parents work and this takes time away from children during daytime.
My days of youth in the late sixties and seventies were nothing like today: I roamed the streets of Manhattan without anyone bothering me. I walked everywhere alone in New York. I was seven years old. I never felt threatened.
Now today's kids appear not to have that chance. They have to go armed with a piece of gadgetry. Devices like cell phones and GPSs can fail, and it seems going places with a hand-held device is a part of our lives. We will never be free from constant surveillance.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]