Should Parents Be Held Responsible for the Bad Acts of Their Children?

After more than two decades of practicing law and coaching youth sports, I can honestly say that in most cases, a bad apple does not fall far from the tree.   Yes, I believe parents should be held accountable for the wrongful conduct of their children.

I've observed that children who are productive and well behaved seem to have active parents in their lives. Parents who show an interest in their child and who are involved in what the child is doing. These parents walk their talk and lead by example. The kids pay attention to this.

On the other hand, and almost without exception, the kids that I've seen with behavioral problems or who break the law, steal, vandalize or harm others, usually have not grown up with a strong level of parental supervision. In many cases, the parents themselves have bad habits and the kids simply mirror what they see happening at home. In other instances, the parents are not around and the child is left to take care of himself. This is not a good recipe for success. In this second example, the misbehaving young child is a product of his surroundings and it is what it is.

Now don't get me wrong. I know I'm generalizing. Truth be told, good kids can grow up to be bad people and bad kids can grow up to be successful leaders. Everyone's different and every situation is different. But generally speaking, I stand behind my observations made both in court and in life.

Now the above of course is not applicable in all cases but generally speaking, these are my observations. As such, a negligent parent should, in good conscious, be held responsible for their child's wrongful conduct which, in many cases, is the result of the parent's lack of care and attention. And I'm not alone in this opinion…

Long ago, the California Courts recognized a parent's responsibility for his or her child. "The parent has a special power of control over the conduct of the child, which he is under a duty to exercise reasonably for the protection of others. He may thus be liable for failure ... to take reasonable efforts to restrain and correct [the child] when he manifests a tendency to beat other children with a stick," or engages in other dangerous behavior. Singer v. Marx, 144 Cal.App.2d 637 (1956).

And in the case of Reida v. Lund, 18 Cal.App.3d 698 (1971), the court held that the key to holding parents accountable for their children's dangerous acts is whether they are aware, or should be aware with reasonable diligence, of the minor's bad tendencies. The court stated, "Parents are responsible for harm caused by their children only when it has been shown that the parents, as reasonable persons, previously became aware of habits or tendencies of the infant which made it likely that the child would misbehave so that they should have restrained him in apposite conduct and action."

It's important to note that in California, and most states for that matter, the law is not limited to specific situations. Rather, parents face liability for "any act of willful misconduct" by their children that "results in injury or death to another person or damage to another's property." California Civil Code Section 1714.1(a).

Although financial liability may be imposed on a parent, this liability is generally not unlimited. In California, a parent's liability for automobile accidents caused by a reckless minor driver is normally limited to $15,000 per person and up to $30,000 for all bodily injuries. Another $5,000 is available for property damage. For other matters, Civil Code Section 1714.1(a) limits parents' liability for nonvehicular-caused events to $25,000 for each separate act of their children. And Education Code Section 48904 limits a school district's liability for a misbehaving student to $10,000.

So what do you think? Am I on point or way off base? Share your feedback and thoughts with me at www.JacksonWilson.com