Is Internet filtering a good idea

The protection from Malware is one obvious advantage.
Avoiding unsafe content an even more important one.
And I know the advantages are important. After all, this is from a teen who installed a web filter on his own machine.

Yet
Given that no software system is perfect, should it be considered unwise to depend on one to protect a child you love from an enemy you do not understand?
Given that the child often has better IT skills than the parent, is it unwise to leave them unsupervised at all?
In what ways could it actually harm the relationship, suggesting perhaps a lack of trust?
To what extent does sheltering children make them more vulnerable when the parent can no longer shelter them?

So generally, when and why is web filtration wise and when is it more a problem than a solution?

@ JosiahK,
I'm gonna answer you like this.....
When my children were small, I had the ability to "block" MTV from my t'v set, it
wasn't age appropiate for them at the time,once they were older then they could decide
what kind of music they wanted to listen to, in the meantime, I taught my children about
what kind of values they wanted to have in their lives and the consequences of their
decision's, good or bad....
There are to many kids on milk carton's, kidnapped, missing....only to be found later
deceased...IMHO, I'd much rather have my kid mad at me for a little while, because I stood
between them and danger
MissPlaced

I understand the critical importance of protecting the child. I only dispute whether this is an appropriate way to go about doing it.

In particular many people seem to rely on it as a final solution, which it isn't. For example K9 (the software I use) acknowledges that it can only really be used to protect good kids. If the child wants to be rebellious, they will be able to bypass it eventually. It is imperative that it is used in conjunction with other parenting techniques, to the point where "this page is filtered" is greeted with relief that they didn't run into a trap.

Even if the filter had an impenetrable iron hide, such that it cannot be removed and cannot be bypassed by the smartest and most determined teen hacker, it is questionable whether it should be relied upon. For one thing, it could make the child even more vulnerable once they start up on their own or when browsing from someone else's home. More importantly over-reliance on such a static filter might leave them open to something not considered a threat. For example even if you block social networking sites because your child is sensitive to bullying, they might be upset by something on an online forum such as this one.

Whether they're mad at you for a while is hardly relevant in my opinion. However other things in your relationship could be affected. For example if they feel that you don't trust them, children won't behave as well as you'd want.

@ JosiahK

You actualy ask two questions here?

First one is "Is Internet filtering a good idea".

My answer is straight foreward. "Nope, they can easily get around it, if they want to and will do so".

Second one is much more involved, "Especally in a parent-child relationship".

This question certainly involves "Parenting Skills" that some how seems to be now lost, thanks to Doctor Spock and many others?

MissPlaced Posted a Good Post showing "Parenting Skills", but her comment about".IMHO, I'd much rather have my kid mad at me for a little while, because I stood between them and danger". may have been misunderstood? I will leave it up to MissPlaced there.

My own Family, for hundreds of years have used "Parenting Skills". No Child has ever been abused or belted. This has been passed onto my Kids, Grand Kids and I am sure will be carried on to my Great Grand Son and so on.

Simply put,really young ones are encouraged to ask questions, Adults will find answers for them if they can't. As they get older they are taught to be responsible for what they do. When Pueberty arrives, they are treated as Adults, but they know that they are fully responsibe for whatever they do. The Family is always there for Support. If they do get into trouble, we support and advise, but not protect.

Ray.

@ JosiahK,
I think that you and Drovers Dog make valid point's about "internet Filtering"...
most children today can get around those without breakin a sweat...
and it would be foolish of me to attempt to address that issue, since i know very
little about it(my friends refer to me as the queen of whoville )...
What I was addressing was the "Parent Child" Relationship,You seem to be concerned
with the trust issue, this i'm going to address....
It's not easy bein a "Tweenager" your no longer a child and your not yet an adult,
your full of curosity and rebellion at the same time,yet you instinctively KNOW that you
can depend on your parent's and trust them when you need them,BUT you're still trying
to figure out who you are in the vast scheme of things and resent parental involvement
in your ability to make decisions for yourself,This is normal and a part of growing up
sometimes I protected my kids, and sometimes i let them learn for themselves, it always
depended on the situation.
Now in the face of potential danger, you can bet your last nickle that i did whatever
was necessary to keep them safe from harm! and if that included prying into what they
considered to be their "personal business" then so be it,did they like it?? NOPE..
did I care that they didn't like it..NOPE... did it ruin our relationship?? NOPE.
My first responcebility as their mother was to keep them safe from harm, my children and I
have always had an open and honest relationship, what kind of parent would I be if I
delegated my responcability to my kids who weren't ready to make the kind of mature
decisions that were necessary???
Case in point:
I once transported a little 5 year old girl, not because she was challenged in any way,
but because she refused to stay in her seat on the big school bus...this didn't fly
well with me for these reason's...
1)her parent's weren't bein parent's
2)guess who was running that household??
3)Funds were bein allocated to transport this child,which mean't that those funds weren't
going to be available for a child that really did need those services
Children need to be able to make decisions and learn from those decision's, that's how
we all learn,but those decision's need to be tailored to the age of the child,you wouldn't
let a 5 year old drive a car, that would be sheer foolishness!

When my son was in college, i had to tell him that i really didn't need to know everything
I slept much better if i didn't know....
through his growing up years did he learn some lesson's the hard way?? YES!!, did he like me when he did?/ NOPE....

MissPlaced

It is really each parents choice to make sure their children experience an enjoyable experience online.

To do this is not always, "The look over the shoulder method". You, the parent will just end up with a crick in your neck, and a more motivated child to see what 'it is' that his/her parents don't want them to see.

It lies in Education by the parent as to what method suits them. Either a Hosts file Filter, Restricting known sites which are not only bad in the sense of malware, but unsuitable for children.

Trial and error, the Emperical Method, using your idea of a pleasing Search Engine to gleen what is available and putting those brain cells to work. If you can read, you can learn, if your kid's can read, they can also learn which seems to be the problem. Do you let your child learn 'openly' - haphazardly wandering the WWW, and Internet, learning things you wish they didn't ?

I found with my Son, he had a moral leaning to not do illegal, stupid, gross things online but rather search out info on what his interests were; such as Games, and Music. If this attitude can be encouraged at a crucial age between five to ten years all the better.I would not rely on their school to teach such things, it is your computer, your child.

Learning firstly how to "Filter content you don't want" will lead on to knowing how to filter what you want your kids to see online.
I wouldn't list such mechanisms, they are many and varied, I would encourage researching, online, through sites you deem trustworthy, with a good reputation. It doesn't need be a financial solution, it is your decision. With Governments of the world bumbling about with the notion of taking sites offline for minor copyright infringements, it seems we may no longer have much choice.

That aside, I believe having a safe method of purchasing said items, in my case a Debit card, with only the amount needed to purchase 'the item' in the account a good method. Children, teenagers, soon learn if they have the money to purchase items set by their parents are unlikely to steal media, we would like to believe

A child five years or under should not be left alone will using an online Computer.

Im not opposed to parents filtering their tv/internet for their kids to help keep them from watching innapropriate shows, but that parents shouldnt rely on such filters and it shouldnt give parents the right to just go "oh its filters they can watch whatever tv they want" no they still need to be involved in their kids lives, and show/explain to them why its filtered and set guidelines. Once their older, they can make their own decisions, but Im sorry, but I dont want my 5 year old watching scream 2. Thats just the way it is. (not that I have a 5 year old [not yet anyway] but if I did, their not watching scream 2) filters are best used with parental interaction-as tools to help the parents, not an excuse to let the tv be the babysitter.

I think it depends on the age. For instance, if you are dealing with a 9-12 year old, I think it is appropriate to leave internet open and see how they respond; of course you would be tracking what they look at and with more than the history. If you are dealing with younger, I think that the mere exposure, to the wide array of negative material on the net, requires that some form of filtering be used. I would always be open and simply let the child know, regardless of their age, that I am monitoring what they do on the net.

For teenagers, I am really not sure what to think. On one hand, I believe they, if they have proven themselves responsibles, deserve certain measures of privacy. On the other hand, I believe that the internet is a dangerous place for teenagers and even the parents. I suppose I would always monitor, though it makes me uneasy to admit that.

I'm sure a lot of kids have seen some things that they would rather not, online. We take cues I suppose, dependant on their age. "Oh Yuck !", is time to do something, plus I'm talking Computers, and Internet, not T.V.

Personally, I use Adblock as I'd be saying, "Oh Yuck !" constantly if I didn't.

Another thing is Facebook. I don't use it, but my recently graduated from school 18 year old Son admits it can get very heavy. A few of his peers at school over the last couple of years have committed suicide due to Cyber bullying, which is so sad, incomprehensible to myself, and shows people can be even more dangerous than the content that may be seen online, or on T.V.

Instilling a good relationship, and trust with your children is all we can hope to do. We can then have talks about things that may worry them, taking a positive approach in guiding them how best to cope with the inevitable bad vibes life can offer up; a great responsibility. Once taught how, people, kids, choose to steer away from what upsets them.

Internet Filtering by a Government is just ridiculous, it's hard enough filtering content entering a Home, let alone a whole country ...

I oppose to specific filtering for our kids at home, they can freely browse any site I can.
Then again, our oldest is 9, and none of them are allowed to use a pc without supervision here. No smart-phones for them either... Our son has a FB account since a year or so, and we teach him what to share with other people, what to keep to himself, and why.

Also, I log all connections made from our router/modem for other reasons, but if I would like to do so, I could monitor afterwards (or real-time ) in stead of pre-filter content.

The HOSTS file, AdBlock, NotScript, a PopUp blocker and a bit of common sense combined seem to do the trick so far!


In case of SCHOOLS however, now that's a whole other thing...!
I would be seriously angry if schools would not monitor and filter unwanted and "dangerous" content.


Just my 2 cents,

\0/
-Sec

"I oppose to specific filtering for our kids at home, they can freely browse any site I can."

Right.

"The HOSTS file, AdBlock, NotScript, a PopUp blocker and a bit of common sense combined seem to do the trick so far!"
Not intending to point out a contadiction, although you suggest opposing Specific Filtering for your kids; and go on to describe a bunch of filters.

Don't take this comment in the wrong way; I firmly believe; a "HOSTS file, AdBlock, NoScript, a PopUp blocker and a bit of common sense..." are excellent protection against redirects, Malware, and not so nice imagery for Kids, and Adults.

I think educating IS MUCH BETTER than trying to block something..

Its human nature i think TO TRY AND GET AROUND A BLOCK!! -- But if you take the time to teach them WHY IT ISNT GOOD,they are less likely to try and do it anyway..

First problem with censorware is that it doesn't work. I want you to imagine someone who leaves their toddler home alone being babysat by a robot. Wouldn't you agree that's crazy? Do you honestly believe any computer program has a prayer of determining "safe" content from bad content? I go to google right now, set safety to "strict" and type in "breasts" and while most of the images that come up don't show nipples, they do show... you guessed it, breasts. Huge bouncing breasts. And some of the pictures do show nipples.
Same test, only web search instead of image search, the word "tickle" and within the first 20 pages several sites come up that are sexual tickle fetish websites that have photographs, drawings, animations, video clips, and rated R erotic tickling stories. And you can continue doing this with other words that are relatively innocent, but are common sexual fetishes, i.e. feet etc.

Simply put, all censoware is either just plain not going to hardly block anything, or block just about everything. Here is an old article about why censorware doesn't work, why just about everybody knows it doesn't work, and why it doesn't matter that it doesn't work http://www.dansdata.com/censorware.htm

Then comes the morality of filtering, with or without software, what your kids are allowed to see and read.

Popular belief is children (any one under 18) are innocent angels incapable of impure, sexual, or malice thoughts, until some horrible person "exposes" them to something which will hurt them and scare their angelic minds. Nothing could be further from the truth. Kids are perverted, nasty, profane, cruel, selfish, malicious, by their nature.

I don't believe an image of a naked woman can "hurt" a little boy. I don't think it makes him into a rapist, or makes him autistic.
I've always wondered why parents assume "cuss words" and nudity will "hurt" children.

An interesting thing about raising a daughter and wanting to keep her away from perverted and dirty old men, and sex in general: the more you tell a girl she can't have sex, the more she's going to want sex with a boy the moment your back is turned. Yet when girls have the freedom to do what ever they want, they are surrounded by boys offering them sex all day long, and they get tired of the offers, and wish these disgusting jerks would leave them alone. But the moment she is told sex with boys is completely forbidden, now she wants sex from a boy. That's just how the female brain works.
And if you got a 13 year old boy, and you find some porn on his hard drive, or back in the olden days, a porn mag under his mattress and a jar of Vaseline under the bed, what you have is a normal healthy 13 year old boy. If your 13 year old boy shows no interest in girls, and you find precious moments figurines under his bed, that's when you should actually worry!

And if the internet danger is political ideas, well, school is going to indoctrinate the child into mainstream ideology, and there's nothing you can do about it.
And you can block MTV and everything else, but if a kid goes to school and everyone has their nose pierced, wearing their hat backwards, and listening to gangsta rap, your child will imitate that environment.
If you let your kids go to wikipedia, they can learn about gay culture, feminism, nazism, satanism, and so on. Of course if you block wikipedia they can't do their homework online.

So best bet is to let the kids explore the world, make up their own minds about things. I believe that is the moral decision. And even if you do want to blind your kids to reality, well, filters don't work, so just get 'em off the internet, home school them, and never let them leave the house, because all of their friends are going to have iPhone and Laptops and be showing each other raunchy jokes and disgusting things on youtube.

And if you're concerned about "cyber bullying" and he is sheltered from that, how is your kid going to deal with a good ol' fashioned real life bully who does more than say "you look like a queer" but actually says "let's smear the queer" and punches him in the face.

I mean, what is wrong with kids today. We used to all get bullied, pushed around and beat up occasionally, and we lived. Today's kids are killing themselves the moment you criticize their retarded "woe is me" poetry.
Maybe we're sheltering them a little too much as it is. Hey, maybe if we let them view some porn and horror movies we'd toughen them up and they won't kill themselves the day someone unfriends them on facebook.