Are parents responsible??

[billybones]

Quite often when shopping these days I see that parents are letting thier small kids push the shopping trolley or being asked to get something for the basket. Sometimes when pushing the trolley they will bump into a display causing some things to fall and break or even just ram thier trolley into a shelf. Most of the parents then seem to just laugh or pretend nothing has happened and continue on with the shopping.

Should the parents have to pay for the broken item or help cover the cost to the shelf? Sure the supermarets make a lot of money and are able to afford some of this cost but I`m sure that if you were able to afford an expensive car you would still expect the parent to pay for the damage should thier child scratch or damage it in some way...

 

[Naughty Thoughts]

Morally I'd say that yes, a person damaging another's goods ought to pay, but legally a shop displays its wares at its own risk.

Back in the day, most shops were just a counter and customers would wait in line, ask for the goods and the staff would fetch them from the shelves. Then along came the "super" market where customers could pick and choose the goods they wanted.

These days shops find it cheaper to sell groceries direct to the public and absorb the costs (or pass them on) rather than hiring an army of staff.

Note that this mostly applies to groceries and everyday items. Many are realising that it is much more profitable to keep the customers out of the shop altogether and sell on-line.

 

[svengali]

Legally, you can be held responsible for any damage or injury caused by you, your property or any animals or children under your control. These days people are much more inclined to make a stink and try for the "jackpot" in court over silly things, probably following the American way.

In shops, people definitely should keep the anklebiters on a tight rein. Recently, I saw a cute little girl pushing a kids trolley around Bunnings. She charged down an aisle and rammed it right into a man's leg (ouch) Fortunately, he was her Father but anyone else would have been mighty annoyed.

 

[norimus]

I usually think.. your kid your responsibility.. and until he or she is 18, anything he or she breaks.. shall be be covered by parents.. that would put the cat amongst the pigeons.. that includes : damages, grafitti, public nuisance, drunken rampages, scratches, littering, etc etc.. all should come out of the parents pockets.. i wonder how many parents would then claim "it wasn't me, i can't control my kid, blah blah blah..when a $2000 fine for littering comes through the mail LOL

 

[skye]

Hmmmm well children need to learn for sure and the only way is to do things and make mistakes. That applies to everyone. Damage to a car is different then they should pay. But supermarket no. No way if anything while your spending your hard earned cash on there over priced food you can afford to loose something here or there. There multi billionaires those owners of large food marts.

 

[Fudd]

I found this article interesting insofar as this topic is concerned.

Youth increasingly narcissistic says psychologist Jean Twenge

Fudd

 

[WRXXR]

Its definitely the parent's responsibility and i assume supermarkets and the big 4 would see a lot of damage but i' dont think there would be much damage in normal shops.

Occasionally a bit of damage but retailers quickly learn not to put delicates within reach of kids Kids by nature are inquisitive (very diplomatically put!) so even the best parent's will struggle to keep them in line.

Its all well and good to plaster "you break it, you buy it" signs over the shop walls but that creates an unfriendly shopping environment. Retailers simply can't afford that anymore and they definitely can't afford to charge a customer for the damage. Sometimes its far cheaper and easier to write off a few hundred bucks worth of product (although very rarely that much).

 

[Rochelle]

Yep....agree.....it is the parent's responsibility to keep an eye on their kids. And we might complain about the overpriced products in the super market shelf but at the end of the day it is not in our possession unless we pay for it and in general terms: don't damage something that doesn't belong to you....or don't let rag rats do something they are not able to do yet.
On the other hand I am sure super markets cater for situations like that and if you ask as a parent to replace the item they will most likely let you off.......but at least try!!!!!!
R.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

lol or don't let your kids push the trolley.

 

[wingman]

I think the parents pretend it didn't happen because otherwise they'd be giving the child attention, which is exactly what it's seeking. For all you know they may tell the child off later when they're not in public.

But in saying that most parents are awful these days, and as a result most kids are too. So I don't ever want to have some of my own so that I don't contribute to the trend

 

[Naughty Thoughts]

Its all well and good to plaster "you break it, you buy it" signs over the shop walls...

That's illegal, at least in WA. It's also illegal to put "no refunds" signs.

 

[billybones]

I agree that yes the big supermarkets can afford to lose the odd bit of food or whatever once in a while due to kids damage but it`s not the money but rather I think it`s more that the parents need to control thier children more and try to teach thier children to show respect for other peoples things...
Sorry Wingman but I think the children need to be told off then and there, not later when the child might even had forgotten what it had done.

 

[norimus]

agree with billybones.. you need to tell the kid immediately otherwise he'll forget and not get the full message..
don't know about "you break it you buy it" signs.. i remember seeing some very cute signs with something similar to "pretty to see and nice to hold but if you break it consider it sold".. i think that is nicely enough put..

 

[Alecia the Foxx]

"I think the parents pretend it didn't happen because otherwise they'd be giving the child attention ..."

If that is the case, then it is erroneous. If one is following that particular philosophy of parenting, then only negative behavior that is not deliberately damaging to property is or other people is ignored. If the child is causing damage to property or others he/she needs to be addressed at the time.

And in terms of the claims that the teens and early twenties of today are more narcissistic then previous generations, that is what our parents said about us, and their parents before them ... and so on.

 

[norimus]

you know.. for a "sex" oriented forum, i think i've seen more interesting subjects being debated than any "prestigious" TV show.. really.. and the oppinions expressed are 10 times healthier than any ACA investigation or allegation.. well done !

as far ast the kids are concerned.. as I have said before.. telling them when they're wrong doesn't hurt at all and it actually gets them straight back on track.. or so it should

 

[racer]

Educated people are probably more open-minded when it comes to sex

 

[ohhnoes]

I reckon they should, it will make them teach their kids some manners and responsibility.