Parental Eavesdropping

Striking a blow for rebellious teenagers, the Washington Supreme Court ruled Thursday that state law prohibits parents from eavesdropping on a child's phone conversations.
The case reached the high court because of a purse-snatching. A 17-year-old boy was convicted of the robbery, in part on testimony from his girlfriend's mother, who overhead him discussing the crime on the phone with her daughter.

The daughter had taken a cordless phone into her bedroom and closed the door. In another room, her mother pressed the speakerphone button on an extension, listened in and took notes.

The court ruled that the daughter and her boyfriend had a reasonable expectation of privacy on the phone...The boyfriend will get a new trial.

OK, who is the real lawbreaker in this case, the eavesdropping mother, the complicit daughter, or the theiving boy?

Comments

  • 24 Comments sorted by Votes Date Added
  • What if they had been making out in the living room (people used to have those) with the door closed and the mother had heard the conversation from the hallway? They also would have had a reasonable expectation of privacy in that situation, would they not. Although I found out that was a false assumption when I was in high school.
  • They probably have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the backseat of a car.
  • What if the mother suspected something bad was going to happen to her daughter and only wanted to protect her?

    But in answer to your question, you wrote them in the wrong order. 1 - the thieving (i before e except after c) boy, 2 - the daughter and 3 - the mother.
  • I used to think my parents had me bugged because it seemed they knew what I was going to do before I did it. What is the statute of limitations on "parental eavesdropping"? Maybe I can go back and recover some of my lost allowance or find that piece of skin that my Dad took off my backside.
  • Count me as a lawbreaker too. I'll eavesdrop when I think I necessarily need to and my teen can take me all the way to the supreme court. If I'm going to be held legally accountable and responsible for a minor; well, then I guess it rolls right downhill.
  • Ray I can't directly answer your question because I believe those jerks in the Washington Supreme Court have made an error in their interpretation of what is a reasonable expectation of privacy for a juvenile. I will continue to monitor my son’s activities both on the phone and on-line. I guess that will be the next case, Internet and e-mail use, or perhaps text messages, when will it end?

    In this case didn’t the local law enforcement ask this mother to help investigate? What if this was related to a murder and she put a recording on the line as in Scott and Amber? OK, let’s see, we have taken the ten commandments out of school, teach kids how to put on a condom, provide daycare for unwed teen mothers who are still in school, tried to take God out of the Pledge of Allegiance, and now we as parents have no ‘rights’ to monitor phone conversations our kids have? Where do we go from here? Will this have any implications in the workplace? We state that we have a right to monitor all electronic communications and also to perform a search of person and/or property.

    OK, I’ll step off the box now.

  • How about a "Family member handbook" that removes the child's 'reasonable expectation of privacy.' That'll be the day. I verbally removed their 'reasonable expectation of privacy.'
  • [font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 12-10-04 AT 12:12PM (CST)[/font][br][br]Don't get me wrong, I think the ruling is incredibly stupid but...

    I've been to many a counseling session while trying to "blend" families with my 2nd husband. I can tell you there are a lot of "experts" who say that kids do indeed have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Always the example/discussion used is if a parent suspects that their child is doing drugs..... I can tell you that all of the "experts" always sided with the right of privacy for the child.

    And, (still being the x}> 's advocate) I don't think that the teenager should have been convicted just because some one's mother said he did it because she overheard a conversation. I don't think the issue was really about what kinds of rights children have to privacy or how much.
  • I like the handbook idea. But since it's an all-party consent law, you'd also have to put in one of those automatic announcement systems that says, "Your conversations with members of this family may be monitored for quality assurance, and to make sure we can keep up with our daughter's no-good friends."

    Brad Forrister
    VP/Content
    M. Lee Smith Publishers


  • "....That'll be the day...". Everly Brothers?
  • When my kids were teenagers they lived in MY house, used MY telephone, slept on MY beds, drove MY car. There was no expectation of privacy because most of their things belonged to me.
  • Had I cooked-up this idea as a teen, I would have reasonably expected my parents to privately tan my hide.

    Sorry, I subscribe to the archaic tought that if it involves my children, living under my roof, utilizing things that I provide, then I have the reasonable expectation to know what the hell is going on at any given time.

    Gene
  • Here's the article folks. The law deals specifically with an "all-party" consent when it comes to privacy the recording of or eavesdropping on private conversations, etc. The legislators in their wisdom when drafting the law didn't put in provisions relating to minors - so the WA Supreme Court applied a straight interpretation of the law. What's interesting to me is that if the mother had told the daughter, no you can't use the phone to talk to that kid because I don't like or trust him - this would never had made it to court. It's a ridiculous ruling in the context of a minor, but it's a smart ruling in the other contexts in which it can be applied.

    [url]http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=eavesdrop10m&date=20041210&query=Washington+Supreme+Court[/url]
  • I didn't think anyone under 18 had any rights - your parents own you and everything you do!

    Maybe the real thieves are the courts for wasting tax dollars!
  • WOW! "Your parents own you and everything you do".????? I didn't know people actually thought that way in this day and age. I never "owned" my daughter, she is a gift from God that I am "allowed" to share life with. She is 23 now and I always felt this way. She was my responsibility for many years, I cared for her and provided for her but that did not give me the right to eavesdrop on her, everyone has a right to privacy even young kids. Yes, if I had thought she was doing drugs or involved with the wrong people I might have done some snooping but by the time she was 14 or 15 she had proven she was a responsible young woman. My own parents were the type to "own their kids", thats probably why I left home the day after I graduated high school at 17, and never went back, I've never wanted to be "Owned" by anyone.
  • I think minors are viewed as Chattel (sp?) Property in the eyes of the law?
  • So, are they (the state) going to prosecute the Mom?
  • According to another paper, the Seattle P-I, they could prosecute the mother for snooping, but more than likely won't. In this case, the Supreme Court is holding the courts and law enforcement to a higher standard - can't use the "fruits" of the snooping to prosecute...
  • In general, I don't think the listening in on your children was illegal per se, I think it could not be used in connection with providing evidence in a criminal case.

    Go ahead an listen in.
  • My son has the right to privacy in the bathroom. The rest is fair game. I've told him he may think whatever he wants, but if I hear it, I'm on it. Ironic, isn't it, that in a time when parents in general are blamed for being inattentive and uninvolved, we're now supposed to not react to things happening to our kids in our homes. I'm not militant with Robbie, just watchful and mindful of what I was like at 14!
    Linda
  • If my parents had been half as savvy as I am, I would have been caught at all the things I'm now ashamed I did but wish I could do again tomorrow.
  • I've often wished that I hadn't been so sheltered when I was a teen. My daughters did allow me to enjoy their friends and crazy antics though, so now I don't feel like I totally missed out ;;)
  • Did you know that a child from the age of 14 is considered an adult (under mental health) and has privacy rights with regard to his/her medical files? Friend of mine was lamenting that while she is responsible for the payment of the medical bills, her child has not released his records to anyone and Mom is nowhere the wiser as to the nature of the meetings her child is having with a counselor!
Sign In or Register to comment.