Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
DragnFly

Facebook parenting for the troubled teen

Recommended Posts

I figure some of you might have already seen this (as it has over 30 million views on youtube), but I figure I would post it here anyways.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kl1ujzRidmU

 

Source: http://www.litefm.com/pages/news-story.html?feed=421220&article=9738000

 

Basically, to sum things up... A teenage girl apparently posted comments on facebook about her father and having to do chores. From what the father says, this isn't the first time she reacted this way and he warned her that if she did it again, the punishment would be more severe. So he posted this video on facebook, using the same medium as she did.

 

It ends with him shooting her laptop several times with a gun.

 

Some praise his approach, while others believe he over-reacted or was abusive. Either way, theres mixed reactions.

 

 

Since, the man has update about the video:

[spoiler=Update on the story]TOMMY JORDAN'S FACEBOOK PAGE HERE

 

Attention Media Outlets:

While we appreciate the interest you're all putting forth to get in touch with us regarding the video, we're not going to go on your talk show, not going to call in to your radio show, and not going to be in your TV mini-series.

 

Some of you think I made an acceptable parenting decision and others think I didn't. However, I can't think of any way myself or my daughter can ...respond to a media outlet that won't be twisted out of context. The Dallas news TV news already showed that in their brief 5 minute interview with the psychologist.

 

Additionally, there's absolutely NO way I'm going to send my child the message that it's OK to gain from something like this. It would send her a message that it's OK to profit at the expense of someone else's embarrassment or misfortune and that's now how I was raised, nor how she has been raised.

 

So I say thank you from all of us. If we have anything to say, we'll say it here on Facebook, and we'll say it publicly, but we won't say it to a microphone or a camera. There are too many other REAL issues out there that could use this attention you're giving us. My daughter isn't hurt, emotionally scarred, or otherwise damaged, but that kind of publicity has never seemed to be to have a positive effect on any child or family.

 

If you're a news outlet that wants to ask us a question, feel free to so via email. I'm sure by now my email address is easy enough to find. It might take me awhile to get to a response because I'd have to sort through the "Die you bastard" emails to find it, but we will respond if its something that we feel merits it. Otherwise, sorry... no interviews, no talk shows, no call-ins.

 

If we respond to anything, it will be on here, and it will be in a way that our words can't be misconstrued or edited for appeal to specific audience or shock value.

 

Now, I'm going to try to get to work for the day.

Best of luck to all of you out there... and PLEASE give my phone a break.

 

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

 

HOW HANNAH GOT CAUGHT

 

HOW SHE GOT CAUGHT: The Dog Did It.. no, really.

 

I finally came out and told her this today, partly because it was too funny NOT to share.

 

When my daughter made her post, she used Facebook's privacy settings to block "Family" and "Church" friend's lists. All her other friends could see it. We, of course could not.

 

One of our dogs is always getting in photos and therefore has her own Facebook pa...ge. It's just a cute dumb thing we did for fun. Well, the dog's profile is rarely used except when funny pictures of her are posted. Since that's not too often, and she has very few friends on Facebook, her wall is kind of bare, with relatively few posts showing up on it.

 

The other night we gave the dog a bath and there was a funny photo we uploaded to Facebook and tagged her in. I logged in as the dog the next morning to comment on the photo. However when I logged into the dog's profile, my daughter had forgotten to add her to the "family" list.... so our family dog's profile showed her post right there on the front page.

 

It wasn't any parent-hacking, computer spying, or monitoring of any kind.. the dog actually ratted her out completely by accident. She hasn't petted that dog all day today...

 

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

 

HANNAH'S REACTION

 

For those that wondered, commented, criticized, and just in general wanted to know:

My daughter came through it fine.

 

Yes, she's in trouble, and yes she's grounded, but that doesn't mean every moment of her life has to be miserable. She's going to come to terms with the changes that will be present for a while; no TV privileges, no Internet, etc.

 

In the meantime, once the initial anger passed,... she sat with me reviewing some of the comments that have come in via Facebook and YouTube. One person even suggested collecting the shell casings and auctioning them on eBay. I said Id do it if it would help contribute to her college fund! When I told her about it, she thought a minute, got a funny calculating expression on her face and said, in that case you should shoot my phone too. We can use more bullets and Ill go half-sies with ya on it! Its not like Im going to need it any time soon. And I can use the money we get to buy a new one.

 

While the whole point of this story isnt funny, what is funny to me is how weak some people out there think kids are. Our kids are as strong as we help them to be. My daughter took a horrible day in her life, had her crying fit, then got over it, accepted her punishment, and hasnt let it (or peoples comments) destroy her strength. I dont get any credit for that. Shes strong and able to overcome almost anything life throws at her.

 

Since this unsuspectingly threw her into the limelight much more strongly than either of us intended, I asked her if she wanted to make her own response video, and told her Id let her do it if she wanted to. She doesnt like being in front of the camera, so she declined, but Ive told her if she wants to write a response or post a video response, Id be OK with it. Its only fair considering the viral nature of the whole thing. So far shes not really interested. Quite frankly it seems shes gotten bored of it much faster than the general public has. If that changes Ill post it here.

 

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

 

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS:

 

Media Response to Anita Li, from the Toronto Star

 

Since you took the time to email us with your requests like we asked, Ill take the time to give you an honest follow-up response. Youll have to forgive me for doing so publicly though; again I want to be sure my words are portrayed the way I actually say them, not cut together to make entirely different points.

 

Your questions were:

Q: Why did y...ou decide to reprimand your daughter over a public medium like YouTube?

 

A: Well, I actually just had to load the video file itself on YouTube because its a better upload process than Facebook, but the intended audience was her Facebook friends and the parents of those friends who saw her post and would naturally assume we let our children get away with something like that. So, to answer Why did you reprimand her over a public medium like Facebook my answer is this: Because thats how I was raised. If I did something embarrassing to my parents in public (such as a grocery store) I got my tail tore up right there in front of God and everyone, right there in the store. I put the reprisal in exactly the same medium she did, in the exact same manner. Her post went out to about 452 people. Mine went out to about 550 people originally. I had no idea it would become what it did.

 

Q: How effective do you think your punishment was (i.e. shooting her laptop and reading her letter online)?

 

A: I think it was very effective on one front. She apparently didnt remember being talked to about previous incidents, nor did she seem to remember the effects of having it taken away, nor did the eventual long-term grounding seem to get through to her. I think she thought Well, Ill just wait it out and Ill get it back eventually. Her behavior corrected for a short time, and then it went back to what it was before and worse. This time, she wont ever forget and itll be a long time before she has an opportunity to post on Facebook again. I feel pretty certain that every day from then to now, whenever one of her friends mentions Facebook, shell remember it and wish she hadnt done what she did.

 

The second lesson I want her to learn is the value of a dollar. We dont give her everything she asks for, but you can all imagine what its like being the only grandchild and the first child. Presents and money come from all sides when youre young. Most of the things she has that are cool were bought or gifted that way. Shes always asked for very few things, but theyre always high-dollar things (iPod, laptop, smartphone, etc). Eventually she gets given enough money to get them. Thats not learning the value of a dollar. Its knowing how to save money, which I greatly applaud in her, but its not enough. She wants a digital SLR camera. She wants a 22 rifle like mine. She wants a car. She wants a smart phone with a data package and unlimited texting. (I have to hear about that one every week!)

 

She thinks all these things are supposed to be given to her because shes got parents. Its not going to happen, at least not in our house. She can get a job and work for money just like everyone else. Then she can spend it on anything she wants (within reason). If she wants to work for two months to save enough to purchase a $1000 SLR camera with an $800 lens, then I can guarantee shell NEVER leave it outside at night. Shell be careful when she puts it away and carries it around. Shell value it much more because she worked so hard to get it. Instead, with the current way things have been given to her, she's on about her fourth phone and just expects another one when she breaks the one she has. She's not sorry about breaking it, or losing it, she's sorry only because she can't text her friends. I firmly believe she'll be a LOT more careful when she has to buy her own $299.00 Motorola Razr smartphone.

 

Until then, she can do chores, and lots and lots of them, so the people who ARE feeding her, clothing her, paying for all her school trips, paying for her musical instruments, can have some time to relax after they finish working to support her and the rest of the family. She can either work to make money on her own, or she will do chores to contribute around the house. Shes known all along that all she has to do is get a job and a lot of these chores will go away. But if youre too lazy to work even to get things you want for yourself, Im certainly not going to let you sit idly on your rear-end with your face glued to both the TV and Facebook for 5 to 6 hours per night. Those days are over.

 

Q: How did your daughter respond to the video and to what happened to her laptop?

 

A: She responded to the video with I cant believe you shot my computer! That was the first thing she said when she found out about it. Then we sat and we talked for quite a long while on the back patio about the things she did, the things I did in response, etc.

 

Later after shed had time to process it and Id had time to process her thoughts on the matters we discussed, we were back to a semi-truce you know that uncomfortable moment when youre in the kitchen with your child after an argument and youre both waiting to see which ones going to cave in and resume normal conversation first? Yeah, that moment. I told her about the video response and about it going viral and about the consequences it could have on our family for the next couple of days and asked if she wanted to see some of the comments people had made. After the first few hundred comments, she was astounded with the responses.

 

People were telling her she was going to commit suicide, commit a gun-related crime, become a drug addict, drop out of school, get pregnant on purpose, and become a stripper because shes too emotionally damaged now to be a productive member of society. Apparently stripper was the job-choice of most of the commenters. Her response was Dude its only a computer. I mean, yeah Im mad but pfft. She actually asked me to post a comment on one of the threads (and I did) asking what other job fields the victims of laptop-homicide were eligible for because she wasnt too keen on the stripping thing.

 

We agreed we learned two collective lessons from this so far:

 

First: As her father, Ill definitely do what I say I will, both positive and negative and she can depend on that. She no longer has any doubt about that.

 

Second: We have always told her what you put online can affect you forever. Years later a single Facebook/MySpace/Twitter comment can affect her eligibility for a good job and can even get her fired from a job she already has. Shes seen first-hand through this video the worst possible scenario that can happen. One post, made by her Dad, will probably follow him the rest of his life; just like those mean things she said on Facebook will stick with the people her words hurt for a long time to come. Once you put it out there, you cant take it back, so think carefully before you use the internet to broadcast your thoughts and feelings.

 

 

- Taken from Tommy Jordan's Facebook Page

 

Read more: http://www.litefm.com/pages/news-story.html?feed=421220&article=9744152#ixzz1nvoDwVOy

 

 

 

Source: http://www.litefm.com/pages/news-story.html?feed=421220&article=9744152

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The gun was a little excessive, but he's totally right in revoking that privilege, especially if he's the one buying her everything.


phpFffu7GPM.jpg
 

"He could climb to it, if he climbed alone, and once there he could suck on the pap of life, gulp down the incomparable milk of wonder."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like him much more in his comments than I did in the video. almost seems like they are different people (maybe he is getting assistance with the writing??)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that his responses really shows that he's just a solid parent who was tired of his daughter not appreciating anything, not some crazy redneck who should be institutionalized as some people have said over the internet. I'm also really impressed with the appearant coolness of his daughter in taking the punishment. Yes, I'm sure she freaked out when she heard. Rightly so. But when you step back and think about it, you realize that the fathers reaction was perfectly reasonable considering how she called him out in a 'public' space while making sure that he could not see it to defend himself. I see it all the time on Fabcebook. Someone calls another person out but sets the privacy so that they can't see it. If you're going to post crap about someone, they deserve the right to see it and get their 2 cents in.

 

I like him much more in his comments than I did in the video. almost seems like they are different people (maybe he is getting assistance with the writing??)

I agree, he comes off as much better in the comments. I think this is for a couple of reasons. 1 - Right when the incident happened, he probably only had a few hours between seeing her video and making his response. In that time, he probably was still in the 'rage' mentality. 2 - Sitting on a computer writing a response is far different than making a video response. It seems as though the video was off the top of his head. And surely before posting the written comments he went back and edited and formatted them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^

that's a good way to explain the difference. I'm not completely sold though..

 

i want to add that watching that video when i did for the first time was very depressing to me. the situation seems very wrong and sad. they are a broken family in a broken society.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are a broken family in a broken society.

 

So true unfortunately.... However, we are the leaders of the next Society, and we have the ability to patch the immoral faults of what we see today.... Too bad this will never happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Intentional overreaction coupled with a supportive movement on his side? I'd be insane to call it justified.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Intentional overreaction coupled with a supportive movement on his side? I'd be insane to call it justified.

 

The kid had been warned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Intentional overreaction coupled with a supportive movement on his side? I'd be insane to call it justified.

 

The kid had been warned.

 

The point was - the act of shooting a computer on the basis of that particular facebook post was not justified. The fact that she was forewarned would not be relevant - it still doesn't justify the unnecessary action of shooting the computer. A much more 'severe' punishment is such an ambiguous term that it allows for abuse - as evidenced in many other cases, if it were to serve as real justification for one's asinine decisions/actions.

 

Here's the two questions we need to ask: was it necessary? Did it cause harm, or somehow limited happiness/wellbeing?

 

I'd answer that to be 'no', and 'yes it did cause (unnecessary) harm'. On that premise, I don't think it was justified.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Intentional overreaction coupled with a supportive movement on his side? I'd be insane to call it justified.

 

The kid had been warned.

 

The point was - the act of shooting a computer on the basis of that particular facebook post was not justified. The fact that she was forewarned would not be relevant - it still doesn't justify the unnecessary action of shooting the computer. A much more 'severe' punishment is such an ambiguous term that it allows for abuse - as evidenced in many other cases, if it were to serve as real justification for one's asinine decisions/actions.

 

Here's the two questions we need to ask: was it necessary? (NO) Did it cause harm (NO), or somehow limited happiness/wellbeing? (YES)

I'd answer that to be 'no', and 'yes it did cause (unnecessary) harm'. On that premise, I don't think it was justified.

 

It is no different than speed limits.

 

>Person gets pulled over on a deserted highway for going 20 over the speed limit

>Cop gives them a warning

>They immediately speed off going 20 over the speed limit once again

 

And you don't want to give this person a ticket when they get pulled over 2 minutes later? Is this unjustified?

 

This follows the same pattern

Necessary? Not really seeing as the highway is deserted.

Cause harm? No. The cop just gave a warning.

Limit happiness? Yes. The person is going to be unhappy about having to pay a fine/having their license taken away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not the same thing. Breaking the speed limit endangers people's lives, whereas a Facebook post may harm his reputation a little. The latter is negligible in comparison to your little analogy. It doesn't matter if the highway's deserted - their own life, which the cops have a duty to protect, is at risk. Your argument from analogy doesn't work as they're too different to be viably compared.

 

The act of shooting the computer in itself is harmful - the computer parts may come apart and injure him. It's financially harmful - for a young teenager, a $800+ computer is considered a significant amount of money. Granted, he's the one paying for it - but that doesn't give him an entitlement to destroy the girl's work on it too.

 

I have yet to cover 'emotional harm', too. It's no doubt harmful to at least one party here. Please explain - how is it justified?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point was - the act of shooting a computer on the basis of that particular facebook post was not justified.

 

His laptop. His utilities. His software. His hard work. His name slandered because a teenage girl was being...a teenage girl (albeit spoiled). Traditional methods weren't working (he mentions grounding). In order to shock her enough to get the lessons through, a more drastic approach was taken. It was justified - all of it. If you don't agree with it, that's another thing entirely.

 

financially harmful - for a young teenager, a $800+ computer is considered a significant amount of money. Granted, he's the one paying for it - but that doesn't give him an entitlement to destroy the girl's work on it too.

 

Working to pay off the laptop or anything similar is frequently used as a way to build character. It teaches the individual the value of a dollar. Clearly, the girl is lacking that knowledge and the more conventional routes aren't working to enforce that, seeing as she's having such a difficulty with simple chores. As for the girl's work, you're right. But frankly, she wasn't working for NASA. I think she'll live.

 

I have yet to cover 'emotional harm', too.

 

She's not going to be scarred for life just because she can't get on facebook. The video going viral IMO only enforces what the lesson was trying to bring home. Has this made her cry? Probably. Has this upset her? Probably. If none of these emotional reactions occurred, then the father has bigger problems to deal with. But if they had, they will be short-term. The child isn't being abused here. She was taught a lesson.


hzvjpwS.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't know enough about her background beyond what the father claims. I don't believe it's wise to judge at this very moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't know enough about her background beyond what the father claims. I don't believe it's wise to judge at this very moment.

 

In that case then there should be no judging either way, which renders this whole discussion pointless :P


hzvjpwS.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Precisely. We're operating on assumptions here - you claim that she's a disobedient, spoiled brat. I believe that may not be the case, although it's not entirely implausible. We don't know whether she's being disciplined for anything beyond the Facebook post, and whether the post has been misconstrued (only one sentence has to be misconstrued or poorly quoted to twist the entire context).

 

I believe that the best judgements are based on assuming nothing (or the least possible), so any judgement now would be redundant. Bah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Precisely. We're operating on assumptions here - you claim that she's a disobedient, spoiled brat. I believe that may not be the case, although it's not entirely implausible. We don't know whether she's being disciplined for anything beyond the Facebook post, and whether the post has been misconstrued (only one sentence has to be misconstrued or poorly quoted to twist the entire context).

 

I believe that the best judgements are based on assuming nothing (or the least possible), so any judgement now would be redundant. Bah.

I'm glad you realized early on that being skeptical for skepticism's sake (in this case, at least) is completely [bleep]ing redundant. Is there a way we will know every psychoanalytical aspect of this family? No. The best we can do is surmise. If this guy bought every single "toy" that this girl had, then he has the right to take them away. Any further analysis is, in my opinion, grasping at straws.


phpFffu7GPM.jpg
 

"He could climb to it, if he climbed alone, and once there he could suck on the pap of life, gulp down the incomparable milk of wonder."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether it's justified or not isn't for me to decide. I won't pretend to know any details.

 

It's not how I would've dealt with it though. For one, such a display is likely to build further resentment, not compliance or understanding. Secondly, he's just literally shot to pieces the main piece of leverage he had over her. Thirdly, doing exactly the same thing back to her (some would say with the shooting, going one step further) isn't a great way to set an example.

 

He's meant to be the adult; maybe if he wants his daughter to act like one, he should take the lead and do so first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a badass.


sig2-3.jpg

 

Three months banishment to 9gag is something i would never wish upon anybody, not even my worst enemy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that the best judgements are based on assuming nothing (or the least possible), so any judgement now would be redundant. Bah.

 

Then if we're not making any assumptions and we're going solely off the video and the information provided there, it seems pretty justified.

 

What you're saying isn't making sense to me.


hzvjpwS.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The act of shooting the computer in itself is harmful - the computer parts may come apart and injure him. It's financially harmful - for a young teenager, a $800+ computer is considered a significant amount of money. Granted, he's the one paying for it - but that doesn't give him an entitlement to destroy the girl's work on it too.

Making a run to the grocery store, he might be injured in a car crash. Sleeping at night, he might be injured in a house fire. Living will kill him some day.

 

I'm not sure about his location, but any child's property is legally property of the parent(s) in my state.

I shoot lots of my own property, including clays, targets, paper plates, bottles/cans, and pretty much whatever I damned well please.

Admittedly, I tend to prefer targets cheaper than newish laptops.

 

Regarding the data, she should have kept backups. Even without something like this, bad things can happens to data.

 

Please explain - how is it justified?

Please explain - why is any justification required?


rnHJQwZ.png
In a state of tranquillity, wealth, and luxury, our descendants would forget the arts of war and the noble activity and zeal which made their ancestors invincible. ~Samuel Adams; 1 August, 1776
There are men, in all ages, who mean to exercise power usefully; but who mean to exercise it. They mean to govern well; but they mean to govern. They promise to be kind masters; but they mean to be masters. ~Daniel Webster; 15 March, 1837

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It should be self-evident. If an action cannot be justified, then it's irrational. This irrationality is harmful, and in the context of this specific case with a gun and a laptop, it posed considerable harm and risk as I've highlighted before.

 

I think you pretty much missed the point entirely, Nyo. He intentionally placed himself in greater danger as a form of retribution - it wasn't to teach a lesson, it was simply anger and rage being expressed with gunshots.

 

@Kimberly - You're assuming what he says is true. Is that not an assumption?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Kimberly - You're assuming what he says is true. Is that not an assumption?

 

It's the only information we have to go on. But if you go onto the other foot and say that the acts weren't justifiable you're assuming that he's wrong somehow. Your method of thinking sounds great but it doesn't seem well put into practice.

 

He intentionally placed himself in greater danger as a form of retribution - it wasn't to teach a lesson, it was simply anger and rage being expressed with gunshots.

 

Yes it was to teach a lesson. He set out to do what he did deliberately. If it was simple anger, why would he have recorded it, obviously had an idea of what he wanted to say and do, and then destroy the laptop? All of these things indicate premeditation - thought through from beginning to end. That's not the way an irrational or angry person behaves. He even consulted his wife in it, which was mentioned when he reiterated what she said ("give it a few for me"). So no, it wasn't just a pissed off redneck shooting things to pieces. You can argue how effective a lesson like that would be, but that's not what your posts are saying.


hzvjpwS.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Be careful what you're accusing me of saying. I've merely stated that I believe his acts weren't justified - not unjustifiable. I'm not assuming his actions were morally wrong, I'm inferring that he is. Your quotes are a blatant misrepresentation of my views, and I must admit - it's a great way to distort the truth.

 

It's a more controlled form of anger, but it seems to be anger nonetheless. Are you suggesting that anger cannot be premeditated?

 

Let's just say, for the sake of argument, that your assumption is correct. Let's just say, for the sake of argument, that it was for teaching a lesson and he didn't have vested interest to lie about his true motives. How effective would that lesson be? I've left this out previously simply because I didn't believe it was the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.