Help son looking at websites he shouldnt be

janninew

Percy1983 wrote: »

Funny you mention alcohol as that is another thing I have been exposed to my teenage years and I can say what you say about banning it causes more harm than good. I remember me asking my mum for some drinks (aged 14) as it was the summer holidays and a few of us where going camping, the next shopping trip came back with a 4 pack of strongbow, the other guys and girls had similar amounts of alcohol and we didn't all down everything but drank it as we told horror stories etc, yes we all got merry and had a great time without anybody being drunk. Likewise I started work at 16 and often wen't to the pub after work on fridays.

Now I had another friend who wasn't allowed to come camping (as he asked for alcohol) and was banned until he was 18 in general, no yes we both got rather drunk on our 18th but after than I can count on 1 hand how many times I have memory loss form excessive drinking, my friend got in that state every weekend for months after his 18th, almost like he had some catching up to do.

Now the point is, my mum knew that if she didn't get me alcohol somebody else would, so this way she knew what I was drinking and how much. Likewise if you try to ban !!!!!! with a teenager they will get it anyway.

I guess what it comes down to is my inner rebel didn't take hold, as i was given the alcohol I knew if I didn't do anything silly I would get more in the future (the ladies liked this quality ) and there was no rebellion as my mum said yes. In short she gave me and inch and I took it, if she didn't give me the inch I would have took a mile.

As it is I don't have children yet, but I get a feeling I will be a cool dad in most teenagers terms :cool:

You may think this, but wait until you are a Dad with a teenager daughter, you might not be quite as liberal then!!

I imagined I would be quite laid back, this all changed when my little girl came along!

Tropez

bitemebankers wrote: »

I can't think of any situation where someone looking at (perfectly legal !!!!!!!) !!!!!! on a home computer, in private, would affect someone's job. Anything else would be a gross intrusion of privacy, which is a basic human right.

Some school's that provide their staff with laptops for use in the home require that the staff member agree that Internet use on the laptop will be monitored, no matter where they might be, and the downloading of !!!!!! is strictly prohibited, no matter what the content. Some LEA's, according to my primary school teacher cousin, are in consultation with legal departments to see if they can extend it to non-school property computers.

Viewing a legal schoolgirl fantasy pornographic video as a teacher would get you fired if it were discovered.

And there's been several teachers who have been fired for appearing in !!!!!!, one whose indiscretion occured years before she began training to be a teacher!

Members of the clergy, teachers or staff at church schools and workers otherwise affiliated with religious organisations have been sacked for viewing legal !!!!!!.

bitemebankers

Tropez - if the computer is owned and provided by the LEA, it's not a "home computer". Ditto computers people have borrowed from work. Clearly if you're using your employer's equipment and/or internet connection, you're not in private, and their rules apply.

Some LEA's, according to my primary school teacher cousin, are in consultation with legal departments to see if they can extend it to non-school property computers.

I think you'll find that would constitute a serious Article 8 breach and as such, I doubt there's much veracity to this claim.

Members of the clergy, teachers or staff at church schools and workers otherwise affiliated with religious organisations have been sacked for viewing legal !!!!!!.

In private, on their own equipment? I doubt it. It's simply none of the employer's business, and the law is pretty clear on this.

And there's been several teachers who have been fired for appearing in !!!!!!, one whose indiscretion occured years before she began training to be a teacher!

Actually appearing in !!!!!! is a different matter, because it could potentially bring the employer into disrepute. This they could reasonably object to.

Percy1983

Fair enough if it was a school or any work laptop computer, I wouldn't use it for such things despite knowing how to remove evidence as there would be that risk of forgetting to clear tracks etc.

So for a teacher to let there teenage son do what they like on the school laptop as you say would be nothing less than reckless.

But for a teacher to look at teacher/schoolgirl themed stuff on there personal computers is fine, as long as its perfectly legal the school will never see it or know.

Dare I say thats is a bit of a sidetrack from the original question if its any sort of works computer/laptop other people shouldn't be able to login and use it regardless.

Tropez

bitemebankers wrote: »

Tropez - if the computer is owned and provided by the LEA, it's not a "home computer". Ditto computers people have borrowed from work. Clearly if you're using your employer's equipment and/or internet connection, you're not in private, and their rules apply.

That would be true, were the laptops being leased or otherwise being returned after the period in which they were used. However, much like the crappy laptops you can get for signing up to a 12 month mobile contract, these laptops have ownership transferred to the teacher under the condition that the teacher, during their terms of employment, agree to abide by a list of do's and don'ts... most don'ts.

I think you'll find that would constitute a serious Article 8 breach and as such, I doubt there's much veracity to this claim.

Yet rights can be freely waived in certain circumstances and in this case can be added to a contractual agreement as per the exceptions listed in Article 8.2. As for the veracity, I have several members of my family who are teachers, three of which work in LEAs where this idea is being currently investigated.

In private, on their own equipment? I doubt it. It's simply none of the employer's business, and the law is pretty clear on this.

Yes, in private, and on their own equipment. There was a court case locally in the past few years in which someone who worked within one of the fringe churches had taken their employer to court due to being sacked for viewing !!!!!! at home. They lost their case as they had signed a declaration that they would "act in accordance with the church's teachings" which consituted part of their contract of employment, and they had been daft enough to allow a fellow church member the use of their personal laptop.

Actually appearing in !!!!!! is a different matter, because it could potentially bring the employer into disrepute. This they could reasonably object to.

Viewing !!!!!! too can bring the employer into disrepute. How many parents would be up in arms if they discovered the kids male gym teacher had a hankering for schoolgirl or twink !!!!!!?

Gavin83

Tropez wrote: »

Some LEA's, according to my primary school teacher cousin, are in consultation with legal departments to see if they can extend it to non-school property computers.

This is completely unenforceable and won't happen in a million years.

You can't stop someone doing something completely legal in their own homes. If my employer sacked me for viewing !!!!!! I'd be straight on to my solicitor and would expect a tidy payout.

A work laptop is a completely different matter of course, regardless of where it is used.

They actually looked in my office to use software to monitor people's iPhone usage but discovered it was completely illegal to do so the whole project was scrapped.

Tropez

Gavin83 wrote: »

This is completely unenforceable and won't happen in a million years.

You can't stop someone doing something completely legal in their own homes. If my employer sacked me for viewing !!!!!! I'd be straight on to my solicitor and would expect a tidy payout.

A work laptop is a completely different matter of course, regardless of where it is used.

They actually looked in my office to use software to monitor people's iPhone usage but discovered it was completely illegal to do so the whole project was scrapped.

They needn't worry, Apple is doing that for them.

As for unenforcable, although there are unenforcable contracts, and in fact quite a few contracts are unenforcable in most courts, there are certain professions whereby actions, even legal ones, undertaken outside of the work place can have implications on ones career, and the waters can be muddied somewhat due to things like this.

There's a whole list of things that I'm not supposed to do outside of work.

bitemebankers

Tropez wrote: »

That would be true, were the laptops being leased or otherwise being returned after the period in which they were used. However, much like the crappy laptops you can get for signing up to a 12 month mobile contract, these laptops have ownership transferred to the teacher under the condition that the teacher, during their terms of employment, agree to abide by a list of do's and don'ts... most don'ts.

Still isn't a home computer though, is it? As Percy suggests above, it's just reckless to use a machine like this for any purposes you'd not be happy for your employer to witness. Even deleting history/cache isn't 100%.

Yet rights can be freely waived in certain circumstances and in this case can be added to a contractual agreement as per the exceptions listed in Article 8.2.

Well, if someone is stupid enough to waive their human rights, I'm afraid my sympathy evaporates.

Yes, in private, and on their own equipment.

So if it was private, on their own equipment, how were they caught? Something doesn't add up here.

Viewing !!!!!! too can bring the employer into disrepute. How many parents would be up in arms if they discovered the kids male gym teacher had a hankering for schoolgirl or twink !!!!!!?

If it becomes public knowledge then, by definition, it hasn't been kept private. Certainly, if a teacher was open about their interest in young-looking girls in !!!!!!, then I can understand the objection.

What's "twink !!!!!!" by the way...or do I not want to know...?

bitemebankers

Tropez wrote: »

There's a whole list of things that I'm not supposed to do outside of work.

I think you'll find the legal basis for this is the employers reputation. On that basis, anything legal you do in private is your own business.

Tropez

bitemebankers wrote: »

Still isn't a home computer though, is it? As Percy suggests above, it's just reckless to use a machine like this for any purposes you'd not be happy for your employer to witness. Even deleting history/cache isn't 100%.

Well, it is, because the ownership is transferred to them and they do not have to return it.

Well, if someone is stupid enough to waive their human rights, I'm afraid my sympathy evaporates.

That is fair enough.

So if it was private, on their own equipment, how were they caught? Something doesn't add up here.

As I said, they had allowed another church member the use of their laptop. Presumably, that church member located content on that laptop that was in contrast to the teaching's of the church and alerted a senior member of the church.

Now, personally, I think religion should never have a bearing on anything legally, but unfortunately certain "exceptions" seem to slip through in the name of religion.

If it becomes public knowledge then, by definition, it hasn't been kept private. Certainly, if a teacher was open about their interest in young-looking girls in !!!!!!, then I can understand the objection.

But that's a difficult one. Someone can do something in private but somehow others become aware of it. It could be a slip of the tongue, it could be, as someone at my previous employer got disciplined for, being a complete dope and transferring the wrong file from a flash drive for what was supposed to be a humourous email... it was humourous I suppose, we never let that drop.

It could even be emailing the wrong file from home.

What's "twink !!!!!!" by the way...or do I not want to know...?

It's like the gay !!!!!! version of "barely legal". The male performers are basically young and skinny, at least that is how I understand it.