Driving teenagers from a party to another house after they have been drinking

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am surprised at the number of people okay with having drunk teens dropped off at their house.

Agree. Posters need to flip the script on this one. You told your child he could have friends spend the night. OP drops them off and drives away, they stumble in, and you realize, crap! I have a house full of underaged intoxicated kids. Now what?

Worse, you didn't give permission, and you aren't even home, but there are bunch of drunk teens "sleeping" at your house.

Tipsy is different than drunk, to me. But maybe the OP is downplaying how much they had.

Tipsy is drunk and there's no legal amount of alcohol for a minor.

This is the bottom line. And who exactly provided the alcohol to minors?

They all have fake IDs

Not likely look at half the parents in the thread would be happy to provide alcohol.

But I agree further questions need to be asked.

Please point out in this thread where any parent said they would be happy to provide alcohol!!

Stop acting like there is some huge moral difference between providing it and “just” allowing it. I agree that there is a legal difference, but morally it is the same.

I actually think it’s morally and correct to send a child to college was never experienced alcohol. Is extremely dangerous. And morally wrong

I think you're an alcoholic whose brain cells are damaged as is your ability to think soundly

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel sad for parents who feel like they have to act okay with this.

Well, unless they ARE okay with it. If OP wants to turn a blind eye to the drinking, then turning a blind eye in the car would be the right play.

I’m sort of appalled at these kids. Don’t they have Uber? IMO if you’re old enough to drink, you should be old enough to safely sneak around. The “always call me” thing is for when you’re in trouble. It shouldn’t mean “don’t plan or take any responsibility for getting yourself around safely.” I would have taken them all home.

It's exactly what it is. OP's teen daughter admitted to drinking too, and OP is cool with it, accepting her lie. I suspect there's a history of alcoholism in OP's family, probably a parent given how desperate she is to please and has trouble establishing healthy boundaries.

Are we on the same post?

OP mentioned her slightly younger teen daughter earlier in the thread. Said they talk about drinking, and she said he teen tried it but told her she didn't like the taste, and OP believed that. ot saying thse needs to punish her kids, but she needs to pull her head out of the sand.

You’re back tracking now. You just went from suspecting a history of alchoholism to she needs to pull her head out of the sand.
You are crazy and making stuff up.

No backtracking OP's behavior suggest a history of alcoholism, likel an alcoholic parent. And OP did share that story about her daughter I believe it's on page 2 of this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Drinking is not morally wrong.

There is a huge difference between laws and morals

You don't think it is immoral to violate a law that is itself not immoral? Or do you think the legal drinking age is immoral and should be protested by teen drinking until it is abolished?

Legal and moral are different.

The legal drinking age has changed over the year.

It’s not moral or immoral to drink. It has nothing to do with laws.

It’s legal to beat a suspect in custody, moral?
It’s illegal to go 45 in a 40, moral?

You are trying so, so hard to justify children violating laws, abetted by their parents. Why? Yes, lots of kids drink, but they don't pretend it isn't illegal or that violating the law isn't wrong.

Nobody said it’s not illegal, it’s not immoral.

It’s not illegal to bang your neighbors wife but it is immoral.

You have clearly never studied ethics.

Intentionally breaking the law when the law itself isn't immoral is immoral. Helping and covering for children to break the law is immoral. Helping minors destroy their longterm health is immoral

Breaking the law isn’t immoral. Most laws are arbitrary in nature and about controlling the population.
https://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2016/04/08/practical-vs-moral-approaches-to-behaviors-deemed-problematic/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am surprised at the number of people okay with having drunk teens dropped off at their house.

Agree. Posters need to flip the script on this one. You told your child he could have friends spend the night. OP drops them off and drives away, they stumble in, and you realize, crap! I have a house full of underaged intoxicated kids. Now what?

Worse, you didn't give permission, and you aren't even home, but there are bunch of drunk teens "sleeping" at your house.

Tipsy is different than drunk, to me. But maybe the OP is downplaying how much they had.

Tipsy is drunk and there's no legal amount of alcohol for a minor.

This is the bottom line. And who exactly provided the alcohol to minors?

They all have fake IDs

Not likely look at half the parents in the thread would be happy to provide alcohol.

But I agree further questions need to be asked.

Not at all . I know Parents and either kids drink or would drive them in the situation he would never provide alcohol. There’s a big difference between being realistic and being “the call mom”.

And I'd rather be the call mom aka an actual parent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Drinking is not morally wrong.

There is a huge difference between laws and morals

You don't think it is immoral to violate a law that is itself not immoral? Or do you think the legal drinking age is immoral and should be protested by teen drinking until it is abolished?

Legal and moral are different.

The legal drinking age has changed over the year.

It’s not moral or immoral to drink. It has nothing to do with laws.

It’s legal to beat a suspect in custody, moral?
It’s illegal to go 45 in a 40, moral?

You are trying so, so hard to justify children violating laws, abetted by their parents. Why? Yes, lots of kids drink, but they don't pretend it isn't illegal or that violating the law isn't wrong.

Nobody said it’s not illegal, it’s not immoral.

It’s not illegal to bang your neighbors wife but it is immoral.

You have clearly never studied ethics.

Intentionally breaking the law when the law itself isn't immoral is immoral. Helping and covering for children to break the law is immoral. Helping minors destroy their longterm health is immoral

Breaking the law isn’t immoral. Most laws are arbitrary in nature and about controlling the population.
https://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2016/04/08/practical-vs-moral-approaches-to-behaviors-deemed-problematic/

The author you cite agrees that Americans generally believe that violating a just law is immoral. She just thinks laws should be easier to change, and if we weren't so hung up on obeying the law as a good in itself, we could ignore more laws without penalty instead of changing them. (In fact we do, but she ignores that).

We are not conflating malum in se with malum prohibitum. We are saying that morality extends to obeying laws. Violating a law is malum in se even if the law is about something that is not immoral in and of itself. The author argues that this means one must believe that "changing a law means allowing something immoral to be legal." Wrong. Changing a law means the behavior is no longer malum prohibitum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Drinking is not morally wrong.

There is a huge difference between laws and morals

You don't think it is immoral to violate a law that is itself not immoral? Or do you think the legal drinking age is immoral and should be protested by teen drinking until it is abolished?

Legal and moral are different.

The legal drinking age has changed over the year.

It’s not moral or immoral to drink. It has nothing to do with laws.

It’s legal to beat a suspect in custody, moral?
It’s illegal to go 45 in a 40, moral?

You are trying so, so hard to justify children violating laws, abetted by their parents. Why? Yes, lots of kids drink, but they don't pretend it isn't illegal or that violating the law isn't wrong.

Nobody said it’s not illegal, it’s not immoral.

It’s not illegal to bang your neighbors wife but it is immoral.

You have clearly never studied ethics.

Intentionally breaking the law when the law itself isn't immoral is immoral. Helping and covering for children to break the law is immoral. Helping minors destroy their longterm health is immoral

Breaking the law isn’t immoral. Most laws are arbitrary in nature and about controlling the population.
https://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2016/04/08/practical-vs-moral-approaches-to-behaviors-deemed-problematic/

The author you cite agrees that Americans generally believe that violating a just law is immoral. She just thinks laws should be easier to change, and if we weren't so hung up on obeying the law as a good in itself, we could ignore more laws without penalty instead of changing them. (In fact we do, but she ignores that).

We are not conflating malum in se with malum prohibitum. We are saying that morality extends to obeying laws. Violating a law is malum in se even if the law is about something that is not immoral in and of itself. The author argues that this means one must believe that "changing a law means allowing something immoral to be legal." Wrong. Changing a law means the behavior is no longer malum prohibitum.

And I’m sure you never, ever, ever exceed the speed limit.

[Anonymous]

Interesting morality debate aside...

It is helpful to think through what I would actually do in this situation, to really envision my child in this scenario. I think what I would do is stay quiet and calm, drive the other kids to whichever parents' home they were going to, make sure to watch them walk in the door, and take my own child home. I would then have a conversation with them the following day along the lines of proposed- always call me in those situations, and how to handle alcohol responsibly as they move toward adulthood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You did the right thing. And I would just let it be. That way your DS will continue to call you in these situations. Otherwise he would be drinking and driving or getting into a car with someone who was drinking.

This! Everyone saying otherwise, please note the age of your children.

[Anonymous]

I would prefer to drive them then have them drive. I would have dropped all of the kids off and let the whole thing slide.

But then again, while I wouldn't provide alcohol illegally to underagers, I think the 21 drinking age is stupid.

[Anonymous]

I'd be furious if you picked up my child who you knew were drinking, move them to a different house to drink more and didn't contact me. That is irresponsible. If my kid is drinking, I will get them and take care of them. What if a child got really sick and died from alcohol poisoning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'd be furious if you picked up my child who you knew were drinking, move them to a different house to drink more and didn't contact me. That is irresponsible. If my kid is drinking, I will get them and take care of them. What if a child got really sick and died from alcohol poisoning.

This. Or if your child injured someone else while intoxicated or even was accused of having done something wrong while intoxicated. They could have been home in their own bed instead of in a house of drunk teens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You did the right thing. And I would just let it be. That way your DS will continue to call you in these situations. Otherwise he would be drinking and driving or getting into a car with someone who was drinking.

This! Everyone saying otherwise, please note the age of your children.

Nope. My kids are 28, 26, 15, and 15. Promise to come and get you no matter where, no matter what time. I do not promise to transport you and your tipsy friends to a second location. I picked my oldest up from a party that turned into a police raid minutes after we drove off. And I brought her home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You did the right thing. And I would just let it be. That way your DS will continue to call you in these situations. Otherwise he would be drinking and driving or getting into a car with someone who was drinking.

This! Everyone saying otherwise, please note the age of your children.

Nope. My kids are 28, 26, 15, and 15. Promise to come and get you no matter where, no matter what time. I do not promise to transport you and your tipsy friends to a second location. I picked my oldest up from a party that turned into a police raid minutes after we drove off. And I brought her home.

+1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You did the right thing. And I would just let it be. That way your DS will continue to call you in these situations. Otherwise he would be drinking and driving or getting into a car with someone who was drinking.

+1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd be furious if you picked up my child who you knew were drinking, move them to a different house to drink more and didn't contact me. That is irresponsible. If my kid is drinking, I will get them and take care of them. What if a child got really sick and died from alcohol poisoning.

This. Or if your child injured someone else while intoxicated or even was accused of having done something wrong while intoxicated. They could have been home in their own bed instead of in a house of drunk teens.

This I'm not sure what people aren't understanding. It's good the boys called. It's good OP came and picked them up. It was a dumb move on her part to bring them to the other party.

She could have kept them at her house, and I would have been fine with that, that's not a punishment that being an adult and looking out for the well-being of kids.