November 2007 Archives

A MySpace hoax that ended with the suicide of a 13-year-old Missouri girl has sparked outrage across the country—and across the iVillage community. Reactions to the story were those of shock, disgust, and anger—anger at the parents involved in the hoax, and anger over the fact that no charges have been filed.

Megan Meier hanged herself in October of last year, just minutes after receiving mean messages on the social networking Web site. Her parents learned a few weeks after her death that their daughter, who thought she was communicating online with a 16-year-old boy, was being deceived. The "boy" was created by a mother down the street who wanted to know what Megan was saying about her own daughter, who had had a falling out with Megan.

Although authorities could not find a crime to charge anyone in Megan’s case, many iVillagers, such as snafu2007, believe the perpetrators of the hoax should be held responsible: “The parents who set up the fake MySpace account are criminals and should be punished for their crime against that girl. Since they created the circumstances by which that girl killed herself they are an accessory to that death. I am surprised that there are no statutes on the books in their state that covers this type of situation. This was no 'joke' or 'prank'. This was done to that girl with malice."

Member jamieandlukesmom agrees: "This parent should be held accountable. I agree with what [Megan's] parents said. It's just like this parent put the gun in her hand and had shot her herself. Parents just need to mind their own business when it comes to female squabbles in high school, unless they get out of control."

A number of iVillagers, however, point out that those involved in the hoax may not be criminally liable. Member uk_momof2 weighs in: "I am really on the fence on [the question of whether criminal charges should be filed], since you can't judge a person's conduct solely on the outcome— if the child had laughed it off, would her behavior have been criminal? The courts have been fairly strict in the definition of "intentional infliction of emotional distress" (which I am assuming this would fall under) to separate it from mere bad manners and hurt feelings. Certainly, the parents behavior goes beyond bad manners, but does it rise to the level of criminal?"

Should there be reforms in existing law related to child endangerment and Internet harassment? Many think so. skybroken, who works with teens with depression and ADD, remarked, "The law needs to catch up to technology. For the adults that knew her, and knew her condition, to do that... they should have to bear some responsibility for their cruelty." Member mommagemma agrees: "This is despicable. Cyber harassment should be a crime, because after all, making prank phone calls is a crime; the only difference is the technology that is being used."

For some parents, the tragedy brings up once again the issue of child safety on the Internet. cl-tchav7 says, " I think it's deplorable that there are young children on [sites like MySpace] and there are no checks and balances to keep up with that. I honestly think that, if it has to exist, the age limit should be 18, and the age should be verified by using a credit card number (not necessarily charging the card, but validating the person's age)."

In the subject of bullying, mandeesita offers some thoughtful advice for parents: "I think, as parents, it's our responsibility to teach our kids, not only to not say mean things about others, but that other people are going to try and say hurtful things about us, and it's important to not let it get overwhelming."

What do you think? Should charges be against the adults involved in the hoax? What precautions do you take to keep your child safe online?

Disciplining one's own children is tricky enough, but when the unruly child is not your own, the situation can get downright thorny. Whether it's the neighbor's kid in the playground, or a daughter's visiting schoolmate, should you step in when a child is out of control? This question had a few iVillage boards buzzing and sparked a serious, and sometimes heated, debate.

Many iVillagers, such as momof2fourgrls, feel parents don't have the right to intervene with other people's kids, no matter how incorrigible they may get: "It simply isn't my responsibility to parent other people's children. It is up to parents to deal with their children as they see fit. I may not agree, but I have no right to take that on myself. Imagine how it would feel if someone didn't approve of your discipline techniques and took over for you. Plus, disciplining one time isn't going to magically correct all the problems and turn the kid into a sweet compliant child."

Others, however, have no problem with intervening, especially when the child becomes physically aggressive. Member ashmama says stepping in can be necessary: "When a kid is pounding yours on the playground, and you have to go pull him off? That's not discipline, that's rescue, and I have no problem doing that. And I don't care what the parents think. Usually, they're grateful because they missed what their kid was doing. And if they saw it and did nothing, then their opinion of me is worthless anyway."

cl-elisedf also has no problems intervening, especially in certain situations: "if a) I consider the behavior to be dangerous to the child or others; b) the behavior is affecting my child in a negative way; c) the children are in my home. I'm kind, diplomatic and, I believe, appropriate when I do respond to any of those situations."

There are others who will intervene (albeit with a certain level of discomfort) when friends' or family members' children are involved but will back off when it comes to children they don't know. Is reprimanding a stranger's kid a social taboo?

Member cvanzile weighs in: "I will definitely step in if my friends' kids are totally out of control, hurting each other, or being dangerous and mean, and I expect my friends to do the same with mine when they get older. We see each other as one big family and it's completely normal for "aunts" to have to help out with correcting the kids while we are out. But as far as a stranger even talking to my kids while I am there, I can tell right now that I will not like it, and I will let it be known should it happen. Nope, do NOT approach my children, period, let alone correct their behavior."

But there are others, such as nisupulla, who still believe in the "it takes a village to raise a child" philosophy (even when some would rather the village keep quiet) and have encountered no conflicts when reprimanding a stranger's child: "I am more liberal than most about disciplining other people's children. Of course, I use my best parenting skills, friendly demeanor, matter-of-fact tone, and only in the most conventional situations ... I've questioned children "walking up the slide", throwing sand, calling names, and climbing in what I perceive as dangerous situations, and other relatively straightforward situations. With very rare exceptions, it has gone off without a hitch."

But member ka032006 think many problems may still arise from the situation: "The problem with disciplining someone else's child is that your judgment can be clouded. When we discipline our own child, our anger or frustration is tempered by the love and protective instinct we have for them. When you discipline another child, you don't have that same balance and it's a lot easier to get it wrong ... And when the discipline arises from a dispute between your child and another child, your judgment can be even worse."

The best thing to do in this heated, emotionally draining situation? Member noeinstein offers some friendly advice: "Do what we tell our children day in and day out... Keep your hands to yourself. Use your words. Stay calm."

Share your thoughts. Would you discipline someone else's child? Do you think permitting another child to behave in a way you do not approve sends a mixed message to your own children?

This week the Betrayed Spouses Support board has been buzzing with thoughtful talk and helpful information about a controversial topic: Suing "the other woman" for alienation of affection when your spouse has an affair—which in some cases has resulted in tens of thousands of dollars in damages being awarded to the betrayed spouse. The conversation started with a somewhat light-hearted call to arms, but quickly grew serious as the board weighed the pros and cons.

One big con: Suing the other woman may sound tempting, but it ain't exactly easy. seaofdenial, an iVillager who did her research, points out, "There are certain circumstances that must be met, i.e. legal separation and proof that your spouse was actively pursued... It is quite expensive and most good attorneys will inform you of that. Just a letter informing the 'OW' that she had placed herself in danger of legal action was going to cost about $1,800."

There's also the question of geography: cl-valhalla31z noted that only a handful of states even allow alienation of affection suits to be filed. "I also read that a lot of these cases get thrown out of court, because nowadays they figure the wayward spouse is mainly accountable for an affair (they ALLOW their affection to be alienated)."

As for the pros... For some women, the appeal of filing a suit has nothing to do with the money. radgirl333, who pursued legal action after an affair, remarked, "The money meant nothing... but there is something to be said for feeling just a small amount of satisfaction."

For others, however, money would be the main motivation—although not necessarily for the reasons you might assume: cl_solazzo writes, "For me suing for alienation of affection would be motivated by the material losses that may have occurred. Material losses in the sense that marital assets were used without my consent or joint assets depleted and given to the other person without my consent."

And lovemydog2500 brought up an intriguing angle: "It would be interesting to see how the other woman's husband handled a suit like this. If her family had to feel the pain too."

As lovinhockey17 points out, though, living well may truly be the best revenge. "My personal opinion is that just because someone doesn't take revenge on someone else doesn't mean they are doormats. I left and got on with my life and am leading a wonderful life and that is all the revenge I needed."

What do you think? If your spouse cheated, would you sue the other woman if you could? Do you feel that wandering spouses—and those who knowingly encourage spouses to "wander"—are not held sufficiently accountable for their actions? Or do you feel that suing the other woman is going too far? And just how much should our legal system overlap with our personal relationships, anyway?

Share your thoughts here. And be sure to join the live chat on this topic on the In The Loop site starting at 11:30 am EST on November 5.