Real Life MMD: My son broke boy's glasses - should I pay?

Tetisheri1975

I would ask why they're asking you for money when children get their glasses provided for free and replaced for free on the NHS. Quite frankly, if they've chosen to pay for glasses when they can get them for free, then that's their outlook and shouldn't be your problem.

I would suggest you ask them to drop the £25 charge and in return you won't lodge a formal complaint with the school about the brother's bullying...

hayleythedaisy

If the glasses can be repaired/replaced for free, then no you shouldn't pay.
However, if for some reason there is a charge you should pay half, your son was jointly responsible for something getting broken, that was previously usable.
The bullying should be dealt with seperately either way though. It does need reporting, and the parents may not even know it's going on, the child might have heard his parents discussing "Oh no, how are we going to eat this month and get Jimmy new glasses, perhaps we should suggest they pay half towards them" and decided to "help" his parents.

alspants123

ISAmad wrote: »

Seriously, why in Britain in the 21st Century is the government using taxes to give children 'free' glasses? Britons are amongst the richest people in the world. I presume this parental perk is open to all parents regardless of income?!

It's quite ridiculous that the government should be responsible for buying, repairing and replacing children's glasses.

If the government didn't pay for children's spectacles then the number of children being forced to suffer eye strain/squints (which if not dealt with in childhood can be permanant) and a whole range of neurological conditions would increase! I feel the government have a duty of care to provide free eyetests and specs for under 16s otherwise where do you draw the line, dentists? doctors? hospitals? the country would be far better financially if we didn't have the nhs but we would all be poorer!

Richard_Spud

ISAmad wrote: »

Seriously, why in Britain in the 21st Century is the government using taxes to give children 'free' glasses? Britons are amongst the richest people in the world. I presume this parental perk is open to all parents regardless of income?!

It's quite ridiculous that the government should be responsible for buying, repairing and replacing children's glasses.

For he same reason that we donate over £800m to overseas aid at times of our austerity - because we are civilized, caring, tolerant and long suffering; although only up to a point and that point may soon be reached! Take note Mr Cameron.

janiebquick

This is ludicrous. Children's glasses are free on the NHS, so, if the parents paid, this was their choice. There is no way you should pay towards a new pair.

Feodoble

After reading several replies I take the view... No, you should not pay towards the repair of the glasses.

I would write to the school's Head teacher stating my refusal to be conned by the parents of these two children, one of whom is a bully. I would copy that letter to the parents of the two children, refuting absolutely all suggestions that you or your child are responsible for the accidental damage to a pair of glasses. In that letter to the parents I would leave them in no doubt as to what they could expect in the way of Police attention if the bullying by their oldest child was repeated in any form.

I would then invest time and money in building up my child's self confidence so that he/she would be able to stand up and defeat any subsequent bullying from the older sibling, as left unchecked, that one incident WILL happen again.

lost_2

Richard_Spud wrote: »

For he same reason that we donate over £800m to overseas aid at times of our austerity - because we are civilized, caring, tolerant and long suffering; although only up to a point and that point my soon be reached! Take note Mr Cameron.

To add, a future nation of blind bats would be no good for the governments work horse production line now would it??? This as the governments sees it is investment in the economy. It believes it needs a production line of 'healthy' slave workers to sustain the economy.

As for the glasses scenario, ask to see the old pair to see if they are designer or not. If they are pay half, if not do not pay.

All those of you who are demanding that the children should be punished, by having spending money docked or working to earn money have perhaps missed the most important word. They were PLAY fighting, since when is it deemed suitable to punish children for playing, play fighting is quite a normal activity, no child was injured, only the glasses, there is absolutely nothing wrong with either of the boys actions. So please ease up and allow children to be CHILDREN!!

Cerisa

They are trying it on. Don't pay. Point out that glasses are free on the NHS and that the older son's bullying negates any gesture of goodwill you might have been willing to make. If you pay for them, you'll either be making a point that people should take responsibility for their own mistakes - or that it's a good idea to pay off bullies.

Oh and whoever said it, a child breaking another child's glasses in a non malicious play fight would not land that child in a youth court, don't be so silly.

Oh and Isabad if "Britons are amongst the richest people in the world" then presumably you don't mind making sure kids don't have to go without glasses.

blondnc

For the sake of £25 I would pay for the glasses. If the shoe was on the other foot and you thought the other persons son was involved in the breaking of your kids glasses then meeting halfway on both sides seems the most reasonable option.

By putting your foot down and saying know then you risk grief either from other parents or for your son.

However I would insisted that you would pay only on the condition that the bullying older brother stays away from your son, and if you hear otherwise then you wont pay a penny.

scoobydoobydoo

The issues of free glasses aside, which I agree does sound suss as my sons have always been free......,morally, yes you should pay half.

It doesnt matter how old they are or whether they had been broken before, your son was involved in breaking them and you therefore should be involved in replacing them. Would you accept that argument if someone drove into your car and said that they shouldnt pay for repairs as it was old and had already been in several accidents?