• I would teach the child to be responsible for their actions and pay for the damages. This is part of learning right from wrong. To do anything else would set a very poor example, and basically tell the teen "Anything you can get away with is OK, morally." That is not true, at least in my book.
  • Thinking of the future when my three year old will be a teen, I'd say make her confess and work to pay it off.
  • You are not setting a good example of how honest people live, if both of you do not face the owner and offer to pay the damages. In this case, you are only taking care of one side of the problem. its like your child shoplifting. you punish him for it, but do not take him back to confront the owner of the business. Both are bad examples of not teaching your child the difference between right and wrong. Do the right thing. take your child to the owner and explain what happened. In your childs future, he will thank you for this.
  • I would hold my child accountable. If he was a minor at the time, I would take care of it financially with the person who owned the property, but my kid would have to pay me back for it (either by working it off or getting a job). One of the most important lessons we as parents can teach our kids is self responsibility.
  • I would make the teen apologise to the owner of the property, and then make them work to pay for the damage. 100% of their pay is going toward paying for whatever was damaged, no exceptions. The teen needs to learn that you can't shirk your responsibilities.
  • I would ask them to confess and offer to pay the damages. Doing less sets a dangerous precedent. If you only do the right thing when it is easy or convenient what does that say?

Copyright 2017, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy