Are Parents Legally Liable For Their Children's Actions ?

arents or should parent’s be liable for theirchild specifically or their children if there are a
kids actions, misdeeds or even crimes? A goodnumber of their children involved, rather than only
question that has been discussed hashed andone. If you had to pick a description of the word
rehashed from the dawn of man and women.“vicarious” itself the description
What is the legal view of this – regardlesscould well be “substitute”. Indeed in
of what experts such as the noted experiencedsome areas and legal jurisdictions, in a similar
legal expert and consultant William Simpson hasmanner and model, owners of vehicles (parents
noted? It can be easiest and simply said thator not), who knowingly allow their vehicles to be
parents are generally not liable for their kidsdriven to be driven by underage drivers, who are
“torts”. A “tort” inboth under the age necessary for a
law can be said the general law that is used anddriver’s license and the age of consent as
given for wrongs that are not in the guise ofwell, can be held vicariously liable for negligence of
contracts between people or of events being paidthese persons (including children and underage
for in an agreed contract and not fulfilled or doneminors) who drive a car or truck with the
poorly. What this means is that for accidents orowner’s consent.
crimes done without the agreement of theIt can be said that the action of someone who
aggrieved beforehand are covered by an area ofwas injured by a child or minor might well attempt
law referred to as “torts” orin a court of law to hold the parent’s liable
“tort law”. The basic question isnot so much for the act of the child or underage
then for such crimes and deeds should parents beminor but rather for the facts that the parents
held liable for the actions of their kids and children.might well be held responsible due to a lack of
It is the kid who did the deed not the parent.supervision or care of the parents.
Parents are seldom held responsible – thatChildren learn from what they see and observe. It
is according to the law. However suing anmight be called a case of “monkey see
underage minor is like trying to dry water from amonkey do”. However in dysfunctional
dry well: that is the pump may work well but nohomes and situations people who grow up in
matter how hard you try no water, or only athese environments come to believe that the
small amount – a trickle, will ever comeenvironment that they grow up in is the
out or be produced. The child or underage minor“right” or “correct
may well be held at fault – held guilty and“ one – that this perhaps is the
liable under the law – but that person will“only way to act”.
have no means what so ever to pay. TheThus it can be said that parents of children and
expression in this situation is often thatadolescent teenagers have a responsibility and
“you cannot get blood (or in this caseduty to both provide a good environment, full and
money) from a stone”.proper supervision of their children and be a
What options are available to the aggrieved partyproper role model as well. If not parents can be
or parties? The law itself may try to remedy thisheld liable to some degree for the actions of their
apparent situation by holding the parentschildren – that is if it can be shown that
vicariously liable for their children or by ruling thatthe parents did not provide full and proper
the parent or parents are negligent in failing tosupervision of their charge.
exercise proper control and supervision over their