crzftx wrote:How can anyone reasonably state her ability to socially interact with other humans will not be affected?
How can anyone reasonably state her ability to socially interact with other humans will
be affected? Again, she can call this off whenever she wants to; if she gets lonely or homesick or she can't put up with it, she slips into port, sends a phone-call to her parents, and they come pick her up. And, what - you don't think she'll interact with people when she's in port?
But even if you were right and this was totally the equivalent of her parents dumping her in an isolation tank (an isolation tank she can leave at regular intervals), the notion that children need to be 'socialized' and that we should take away their self-determination on the basis that 'you need to interact with other people or you'll grow up to be emotionally immature!' is pure drivel. It's one thing to tell a child that they can't stay inside playing video-games all day; it's another to tell a child that they can't dedicate a considerable portion of their work and time to pursuing their dreams.
Oh, and, by the way, "I know this guy, he used the internet all the time, and now he's a headcase!" does not count as compelling evidence. In case you were wondering.
Telchar wrote:I do think it is somewhat negligent of the parents to allow their daughter to do this. I would think the same would be true driving around middle asia for 2 years alone. There are people with more experience than her that won't attempt this because of how dangerous it is. I think it, at the very least, isn't ludicrous that social services would look into this. Revoking custody? Too far imo. However, if we would say that she can't make other life altering decisions due to her age (drink/smoke/get a tattoo...these may be legal there. I dunno. I can only speak from my experience) how is it we can say she is perfectly able to assess this risk?
She isn't; that's why children need their parents' consent before engaging in risk-taking behavior. Parents act as both a child's guardian and the means by which we can determine when a child's consent has been attained. A stranger can't determine if a child has given consent, but the parents can - that's the entire basis of parental structure. Anyway, there are people with more experience with cars than me who won't drive to the local gas-station; we don't base risk assessment off of what risks other people are willing to take - rather we base it off what the risks are.
Also, if you think this action demonstrates gross negligence on the parents' part, then yes - you need to take the child away. Don't be half-assed about this; if the parents are putting the child in terrible danger and allowing her to make life-altering decisions that will destroy her future irrevocably, then why the hell aren't you demanding that the child be stripped from their possession and put into social services? Do you think the parents are merely experiencing 'momentary insanity' that will somehow magically pass tomorrow? They're clearly intent on letting their daughter do this; they're going to change her citizenship just
so she can. If you think this is unreasonably dangerous and negligent, your only option is to take the child away.
EvilDuckie wrote:I had no clue what I wanted to do with my life back when I was 13.
She does. Because you were clueless, should we hold those who aren't back?