“Sexting”: a new word in the digital lexicon. And a hot button issue that has piqued the curiosity, ire and concern of everyone from parents to school administrators to policymakers to law enforcement and understandably, mobile carriers such as us. As you may already know, sexting is generally defined as the act of sending sexually explicit photos via cell phones (or over other electronic devices, including computers).
In and of itself, the idea of children sexting is eyebrow-raising. Add to the equation a sender or receiver who is under the age of eighteen and suddenly a problem of ever-growing proportions begins to unfold. Getting the word out to kids about the possible ramifications of sexting is the key. Child pornography charges, a jail sentence and having to register as a sex offender should deter them from sending a racy photo of themselves or someone else. And, even if these legal repercussions were to disappear, the emotional fallout would remain as would the effects such a decision could have on their future.
Our solution: education.
Recently, we partnered with the 
to create a PSA called “Textual Harassment.” The campaign focuses on the subject of “digital dating abuse,” and has been running on mobile, TV and web platforms.
Additionally, we hope to use this blog as a vehicle to drive the latest information, news and expert advice straight to you. Subsequently we encourage you to participate in what we see as an ongoing conversation about this highly sensitive subject.
Let us know what you think.
56 Responses to “Sexting: From Concern to Action”
-
Becky says:
Privacy is a right that we have. However, as a parent, my right to protect my child is a much greater challange in today’s world. So, if the cost of protecting my child comes at the cost of invading her privacy, I will choose the invasion EVERYTIME. If I don’t know what she is doing, then I don’t know how to best protect her!
-
Hugo says:
To all of the comments on here that have refered to this as being horrible, an invasion of privacy or it’s just my right. First of all, if your older than 18 and your parents are still paying the bill then they “own” the phone and you do not have the right to act outside of their rules. If you want the freedom to send and say what ever you want then purchase your own phone and pay the monthly bill – otherwise be respectful and deal with it! Second, rules and laws are in place for a reason and I hope we are all mature enough to understand those reasons, like ‘em or not. Once you cross that line and your actions begin to affect others, you forfiet that right and your privacy. Parents have every right to and should protect their childern with any means necessary. Look around, we live in a world full of predators, deviates, thieves & murders both young and old. I agree with and raised my childern to take care of themselves, to make wise choices and to be mindful of others. Were they perfect? Not by any means but I treated them with love and they me. Until you have childern of your own you will not fully understand the depth at which I speak of. I’m all for freedom (yours and mine) but remember everything comes at a price.
-
Sanj says:
I didn’t allow my children to have a phone until they was 15. Trust or no trust, parents are still responsible for what their children are exposed to and what their children do. I have a criticism for Verizon. The phone that I purchased for my children, allow them to block the Chaperon application when I try to locate them. Although they are complying now, if they were somewhere that they didn’t want me to know, they could temporarily block the locate feature. Verizon’s stance is that my minor child (although I pay the bill) has a right to privacy. Children don’t always do want they are suppose to do, even if you trust them. It’s a parent’s job to to intervene when their children are not making good choices. No child will always do what is right. This is tool that parents can use, to intervene with inappropriate communication from other kids on grownups. Verizon states that they are pro-child safeguards, but they don’t allow parents to have the control over the technology that they should.
-
RobertByrd says:
It’s spelled “unalienable”, not “inalienable”.
-
…referring to @Romulo
@RobertByrd
My children went through the phase where at two years of age they did not wish to hold my hand while crossing a heavily trafficked street. Did I violate their right by overriding their wishes – I say not – I just exercised my right as a parent to protect them from a decision which would have posed a danger to them. The youngest is now five and is now allowed to walk by my side across the same intersection without holding my hand – what a difference three years make – in a couple of years more I foresee that he will be able to cross that street without me by his side. This is but a simplified example of the different developmental stages children go through.
By the same token, would I give a cell phone to a 5 year old? Not a chance! How about a 9-10 year old child? Possibly yes, but with their knowledge that I will monitor their usage until I am satisfied that they understand the responsibilities and the liabilities inherent in this given PRIVILEGE (I don’t consider their usage of a cell phone a right, and last I checked there is no mention of this in the constitution
I would certainly hope that as this same child gets older, our trust in each other will have been proven well enough (my trust that he is now able to judge what is safe and his trust that my guidance is intended to keep him from harm) that will signal the point where I don’t feel I need to monitor his communications.
Bottom line, as a parent your judgment is essential to their safety and on occasion, overriding what may seem to be an inalienable right to an adult is necessary to protect the child.