Beautiful!

nice,need more of this.parents that step up.

Bravo-tough love pays off, it just takes a while.

I admire this mom. She may have well saved her son's life and others by doing this. ww

Great move!!!

Can't wait to see what the bleeding hearts say about that brave/smart/sensible lady. Wish more parents would take action. The old saying, "spare the rod, spoil the child", must have been applied to her when young, and she just handled it down to her son.

I was going to call this "good parenting" until I read he was 19 ...

"I was going to call this "good parenting" until I read he was 19 ..."

If he still lives under her roof, and the car belongs to her, then it is good parenting. I'd take it a step further and kick his rear end out, though.

Well, perhaps... Still, he's also old enough to go to college, join the Armed Forces or vote for Obama.

Mandatory prohibition against drinking alcohol for anyone under 21 is pretty much universal now (think feds tied it to highway funds). Suspect mom was at least as upset about the dishonesty, hiding under seat of car, as about the violation of law. Either way, smart move on her part. Too many youngsters get in serious accidents because of alcohol

Eric - "Well, perhaps... Still, he's also old enough to go to college, join the Armed Forces or vote for Obama."

You forget the most important "benefit" from being old enough... to KILL someone while driving drunk.

"Well, perhaps... Still, he's also old enough to go to college, join the Armed Forces or vote for Obama."

He's also old enough to move out and buy his own car if he doesn't like his parents' rules.

If she's selling the car, I would assume she holds the title. Furthermore, if that's the case then it's just as possible it's also on her auto-insurance. That kind of liability is just too much for her to expect to have to deal with. Perhaps someone should send him a clipping of the second ad as well.

You forget the most important "benefit" from being old enough... to KILL someone while driving drunk

I never even implied that driving and drinking was good.

Eric F - "I never even implied that driving and drinking was good."

No you implied if he was "old enough to go to college, join the Armed Forces or vote for Obama," he was old enough to make his own decisions, even if that includes breaking the law by presumably having an open container and drinking while under age.

AND his own mother had no business interceding in the matter.

Horse hockey! She had EVERY right to teach this miscreant a lesson while she controlled his destiny (not to mention many others in an adverse way), i.e. while he is living under her roof.

And BTW Eric F... from the looks of the thread you've lost this one, but don't despair, we have nice parting gifts for you.

LOL
If bitterness is the face of the new Conservative movement, I'm going to have to rethink my ideals--or at the very least with whom I associate.

I didn't say the mother did a bad thing. I didn't write for the son to go out and get drunk and run over a bunch of children and back up for good measure.

I think you guys are way off-base here. The answer is to treat him like an adult--yes, kick him out, or give him a warning that it is next if it again happens. The answer is not to treat him like a child and take away his toys and then write a classified ad as though the son is twelve.

I swear: AllahPundit is correct in writing there is no room to wiggle with Conservatives. Veer a little from the group-think and be ready to pay!

Eric.

you realize that he is still her dependent, if she literally holds title to everything he has.

Have you considered that despite the "mom" connocations, she probably did this for monetary and responsibility reasons? He may be listed as a driver, but she's probably the one paying the insurance premiums. If she didn't want to bother paying for his fuckups as a drunk driver, then that's her prerogative as an adult.

As was said before, I'm sure they've had conversations to the point of "if you don't like it, leave". She was more than willing to sell HER car that she's letting HIM drive. I have a feeling that she might've thrown down the ultimatem about turning him in to police, too.

Eric, do you remember being 19? Do you remember rationally making decisions as an informed adult at the ripe age of 19?

Very few people have that kind of maturity at that age(especially now, in an age when college has just become a second version of "high school"). Hell I'm 26, and I sometimes feel I act like a teenager.

No matter the age, when you live under
another's roof, their rules apply.

I was going to call this "good parenting" until I read he was 19 ..
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Parenting never stops--ever.

There is a point where getting treated like an adult requires *acting* like an adult.

No one automatically gets the right to be treated like an adult even when they're acting like a child.

I hope that my kids stay at home through college simply because that is the most financially responsible decision that *they* could make. So I'm not going to be on this "kid" for living in his mother's house.

But the idea that his mom shouldn't treat him like a child when he's driving a car she owns and seems to have been drinking in it? I'm sorry. And I'm going to guess that the "meanest mom" and "don't love me" and all of those are *quotes*.

Sorry dude. Act like a child, get treated like a child.

I see where you folks are coming from, and still don't agree. But, it's their family dynamics. Of course, I'm happy there's one less teen driver out there (much less a possibly drunk one).

On the flip side, this is the perfect opportunity for him to get a job so he can get a car and then go drinking and driving.

Eric F - "The answer is not to treat him like a child and take away his toys and then write a classified ad as though the son is twelve."

First of all they weren't his toys as evidenced by his mother's ability to sell the car as the title holder.

Secondly you have no concept of respect and how to earn it.

You damn sure don't do it by breaking at least one law and possibly two and doing so in a car that didn't belong to him.

Call the Whaaaabulance! He was treated like a twelve year old! You're treated like you act, get over it. IF he wants to act as if a twelve year old it's his choice, his mistake and he's paying for it.

"I swear: AllahPundit is correct in writing there is no room to wiggle with Conservatives. Veer a little from the group-think and be ready to pay!"

I hope you're not suggesting that because I respectfully disagreed with you about something that you're not now painting me (or any others here) with this broad brush. If so, then you will amaze me infinitely more with that thought than the other two comments I disagreed with.

"On the flip side, this is the perfect opportunity for him to get a job so he can get a car and then go drinking and driving."

Yes.

And maybe he'd be more careful with a car that he had to work for and make payments on and *pay the insurance* for.

He might not be more careful, but in that case it's going to be his wrecked car that isn't paid for yet and his insurance that goes through the roof and stays there.

Nah Tom Blogical. I was reacting to Marc's and should have worded it more appropriately. I actually missed your second remark, which I do agree with.

My apologies to all who did respectfully disagree and my thanks to those who have written them.

It really wasn't that big of an issue to me beyond saying I didn't think it was all-that fantastic of an issue. Funny, yes.

Eric F:

I thought so. ;-)

If this kid ever googles this up and reads the comments I have only one thing to say do him....

"Dude, pwned by your own mother."

EricF said:

>I swear: AllahPundit is correct in writing there is no room to wiggle with Conservatives.

You mean... Conservatives have principles? How shocking.

=====================

The fact the kids was 19 is what sent it from good parenting to great parenting you nitwit.

Love you too, Paul.

"HURRY - act now, while you still know everything!"

Ha! So true!

I applaud the mother for taking the car away, if it was her car.

But if she is still this involved with her 19 yr old, then she's a bit late in teaching this lesson. But that is not a surprise, we've got a problem in this generation that is just hitting its twenties, they are still in need of, and being, parented.

When I was teaching college part time a few years ago, I had the parents of 22 year olds calling me up to discuss their offsprings' problems in my class.

Taking away his "toys" was the right thing to do. If not the parent, what do you think the state would have done? That's right; take away his toys, or his freedom, or his money, or all the above. If the state had done it, would you have called these repercussions "treating him like a child?"

"... - yes, kick him out,..."

Kicking him out might not be the answer. How do we know he's not in college and wouldn't be able to afford it if forced out of the house? That would be a bit much for something that didn't end in any actual damages or injury. Shouldn't the punishment fit the crime?

"...or give him a warning that it is next if it again happens...."

She did give him a warning. She set two rules, he broke one (the worst one) and she took the car.

Her ad was more an encouragement for other parents to take action and to other teenagers to think twice.

Furthermore, why is disagreement with you on this issue a "conservative" thing?

Oyster, I re-read the article and saw I missed the key part where she bought the car under two conditions--yeah, I'm human too. Still, I don't agree with the tone of the classified ad, even if done in jest-- but she's welcome to treat him like a child forever, and probably will.

Furthermore, why is disagreement with you on this issue a "conservative" thing?

I've seen all-too-often a mob mentality which dubs a thing as "principled" and any who disagree as idiots simply because they aren't part of the group-think.

Of course, I've also been on the other side--and am trying better to watch for it. We don't wear name tags designating our often-intricate beliefs.

Life is just complicated enough to not know if the mother did a service or disservice to the son. Nonetheless, I do now realize it was a dealbreaker--just as surely as if he had promised to pay a loan on it, defaulted, and had it repossessed.

That's pretty much mischaracterizing my post.

No, Eric, they characterized it precisely. You proffered your opinion, the majority disagreed with you. You got pouty and declared it a "conservative groupthink" thing, and then later on you actually bother to read the farking article, find out that the 19 year old violated an agreement, and suddenly find out that the "groupthink" is non-partisan common sense.

And yet, you're still pouty. The hardest words in the English language are "I was mistaken." Period dot end of line, leaving the spin out.

I read the article before. I re-read it today. Unlike some in this thread, I do make mistakes and tried to be big enough to admit when I do. My first mistake was in missing the part in the article about the agreement. The second was in reacting to one person's mean-spirited posts in a way I shouldn't have. I apologized to Tom Blogical and others and thanked them for their opinions. Apparently I should have also gotten out the cat o'nine-tails and whipped my back to a bloody pulp.

Perhaps one day I'll have the pure moral clarity you have. Until that day, I'll just keep fumbling through life, missing some points and gleaning points others have missed. I STILL don't think the woman qualifies as a spectacular parent for doing this. STILL. I've not changed on that one bit. I have changed my views on her ability to take away a car. I still think she's treating him like a child (including and especially via the classified).

I also realize she's fumbling through life trying to do the best she can -- and indeed, she may be completely right in the long haul.
I merely wrote that I didn't think it qualified as "good parenting". Didn't say bad either, FWIW.