Palindrome wrote:

A Canadian court ruled last week that the father of a 12-year-old girl had no right to ground his daughter for disobeying orders to stay off the Internet.

The girl had taken her father to Quebec Superior Court after he refused to allow her to go on a school trip for chatting on websites he tried to block, and then posting "inappropriate" pictures of herself online using a friend's computer.

I have a hunch that most people (and parents, especially) would disagree with the court's ruling in this case, given how ingrained in legal precedent is the idea that adults are responsible for the welfare of their children (parents have actually been arrested for leaving sleeping children alone in a car within sight for mere minutes). And at minimum, it's generally understood by most folks that if two people bring a child into the world, it's their responsibility to care for it. Just as there are different political philosophies, there is any number of child-rearing philosophies available to parents. Some work, some don't; but one would be hard-pressed to allege reasonably that parents should not have the right to instill within their own children values of their choosing so long as they cause no harm in the process.

I think things have gone a bit to far if this is true.

I had heard about this but I originally thought it was a joke. Its really a custodial dispute between divorced parents. Apparently a school had required both parents permission for some sort of field trip and the father refused, so the mother sued. Also, Quebec, like Louisiana, has a system of civil law based on French (and ultimately, Roman) law rather than English common law, so sometimes their courts pop out results that seem alien to people raised in English legal traditions.