Who is on the hook?

April 5, 2008 7:12 AM

Divorced parents. Parent A bought child iPod for Christmas. Child has iPod with him constantly, while in both parents' care. iPod was lost while with Parent A, child is devastated, but iPod will be replaced.

The question is, which parent should pay for it? It will most likely be split between the parents, in this instance. But I'm curious to poll the mefi crowd.

1. If the iPod had been lost on Parent B's time, Parent B should pay entire cost? Or significant portion?

2. Since the parent who bought it in the first place lost it, should they pay the entire cost? Do you feel Parent B has no obligation to pay?

Please, no comments on the responsibility of the child, for this example he isn't at fault. Also, iPod will be replaced, so child will be taken care of, this has nothing to do with how much either parent loves him. He isn't in the middle of a battlefield. I just want to know what's fair in your mind.

posted by Jazz Hands to Human Relations (33 answers total)

Parent B has no responsibility.
posted by fire&wings at 7:14 AM on April 5, 2008

Unless one party is actually personally responsible for the loss, pay according to ability or if both are able to pay, split.
posted by Ironmouth at 7:16 AM on April 5, 2008 [1 favorite]

Did the kid lose the iPod, or the parent?

If the parent lost it, the parent pays. End of question.

If the kid lost it: If he/she is old enough to have an iPod then he/she is old enough to pay for its replacement, or at least to participate in the replacement process. I have a 14yo and she would be doing lots of extra chores to earn money if she were to lose her phone or iPod.
posted by Sweetie Darling at 7:19 AM on April 5, 2008 [1 favorite]

In your hypothetical example, you state the loss isnt the childs fault, and it occurred while with Parent A, so following those rules, I'd be inclined to say its Parent A's responsibility. If it was lost during time with Parent B (and still not the childs fault), I'd say its Parent B's responsibility.

although fwiw, I've never had kids, and while I was growing up, any possessions of mine that became "lost" were MY responsibility. "If its valuable to you, why didnt you protect it better?" If you constantly replace things someone loses, you are reinforcing their habit of not valuing said lost device.
posted by jmnugent at 7:25 AM on April 5, 2008 [2 favorites]

If I am following this correctly, Parent A was actually the person who lost the iPod? If this is the case, I am having trouble understanding how anyone might think replacing the iPod would be Parent B's responsibility at all. Sure, iPods are expensive and it would be nice of Parent B to chip in, but since Parent A was the one responsible for losing the iPod, Parent A should replace it.

If we were talking about something inexpensive like a book, would you be asking this question? It seems like the only reason you're bringing Parent B into this at all is because iPods are expensive.
posted by kitty teeth at 7:27 AM on April 5, 2008

if the kid lost the ipod, the kid should replace the ipod him/herself by doing chores at both parents' houses.
posted by thinkingwoman at 7:32 AM on April 5, 2008 [1 favorite]

Response by poster: "Personally responsible" in this case is the parent in whose care the child is at the time. It is well established that custody of the child includes his belongings. In this case, the parent is the one responsible for the items the child carries as well as responsible for the child. The child is not at all responsible for the iPod. He doesn't have the mental capacity for it, but his life is very much enhanced by having the iPod. Both parents understand that they have to be at hypervigilance level while with him.
posted by Jazz Hands at 7:33 AM on April 5, 2008

Response by poster: I apologize for leaving some details out. I don't want to muddy things up by saying Mom or Dad and having prejudices brought into it. Also leaving out ability to pay, why the child isn't responsible for his own stuff, why he can't help replace it. I'm not trying to game the question, I'm trying to leave out stuff that brings up strong knee jerk responses.
posted by Jazz Hands at 7:41 AM on April 5, 2008

If parent A bought it, and it was lost on parent A's time, parent B cannot mandate that it be replaced.
posted by oaf at 7:44 AM on April 5, 2008

I won't fight your hypo...

I think A is responsible in all cases unless B caused the loss. The parent who gives the gift should be the one to instill a sense of the gift's (monetary) value and to help the child come up with a routine to ensure that the item isn't lost, especially when the child is in that parent's care. Holding the other parent responsible can lead to problems when one parent has more disposable income than the other. If you adopted some kind of policy to split the price of the replacement or even worse, that it's the other parent's "turn" to buy the gift, you create a situation where one parent can burden the other with unwanted and maybe even impossible-to-meet obligations.
posted by the christopher hundreds at 7:46 AM on April 5, 2008

Whoever promised the kid that iPod would be replaced, should pay for it.
posted by Dec One at 7:55 AM on April 5, 2008 [1 favorite]

Parent A bought something and then it was lost on Parent A's watch -- there's no way that Parent B owes anything out of fairness, obligation, or responsibility.

BUT, out of kindness, I can imagine both parents wanting to wipe the slate clean, disregarding who bought it and who lost it, and just dealing with what's true now: "Look, we both see how much he loves an iPod, we both want him to have one, so let's split getting him another."
posted by daisyace at 7:58 AM on April 5, 2008 [2 favorites]

Whoever promised the kid that the iPod would be replaced should pay for it.
posted by majick at 7:59 AM on April 5, 2008 [1 favorite]

Why is question #1 even relevant here? Parent A bought it, Parent A lost it (or so we are to assume if "for this example [kid] isn't at fault"). So Parent A replaces it.
posted by meerkatty at 8:01 AM on April 5, 2008

I must admit that my response is "My God, I will buy the kid a goddam new iPod!" Surely any discussion of this matter is toxic to the kid, who probably blames himself for the divorce. This is absolutely heartbreaking to me. I am sure that I am overpersonalizing this matter, but Parents A and B primarily need to figure out a way to resolve their disputes without further friction.

If you want me to buy him his goddam iPod, email me.
posted by Mr. Justice at 8:03 AM on April 5, 2008 [11 favorites]

No one is obligated to replace the iPod. It isn't food, clothing, or shelter, and presumably doesn't control an insulin pump or something.

Either parent can choose to replace it, just as either parent sounds like they could have chosen to buy it in the first place. Parent A is free to decide that buying the child a replacement iPod isn't with the risk of loosing it again.
posted by Good Brain at 8:09 AM on April 5, 2008 [2 favorites]

I'm with meerkatty on this one.

A bought it, A lost it, A needs to replace it.
posted by JaredSeth at 8:11 AM on April 5, 2008

Response by poster: And Mr. Justice perfectly illustrates what I was trying to avoid. There is no dispute between the parents at all... none. They both have nothing but their son's health and happiness foremost in their lives. This question is academic.
posted by Jazz Hands at 8:15 AM on April 5, 2008 [1 favorite]

Nthing what seems obviously the right answer; whoever lost it, pays for it. If the kid lost it, the kid pays for it. If one of the parents lost it, that parent pays for it.

Why parent B should possibly be responsible for any of this is beyond me. Why is this even a question?
posted by Justinian at 8:17 AM on April 5, 2008

The child is not at all responsible for the iPod. He doesn't have the mental capacity for it, but his life is very much enhanced by having the iPod.

In that case, why should the child get a new iPod? It obviously wasn't responsible enough to have one in the first place.

However, if A is directly responsible for the loss, then A is obligated to do so.
posted by chillmost at 8:21 AM on April 5, 2008

Parent A should not be involving Parent B in this at all, since Parent A lost the item. It does not matter one iota who originally bought the item for the child....it's the parent who lost it who has the responsibility to replace it. If the item were a pair of socks or a box of crayons, this would not even be an issue for the two of you. Even though it's a high ticket item, the common sense should remain.

Never mind that it's parents, never mind that there's a divorce involved, never mind the nitpicks and minor details.....when someone loses something that it's their responsibility to care for, they should replace it.
posted by iconomy at 8:23 AM on April 5, 2008

In that case, why should the child get a new iPod? It obviously wasn't responsible enough to have one in the first place.

Um. I'm getting the impression that the kid is probably handicapped in some way. So I wouldn't push this line too hard.
posted by Justinian at 8:26 AM on April 5, 2008

I think it is A's responsibility to replace it and B wouldn't be in the wrong if he/she didn't want to chip in, but since this is such an important item to the kid I think the right thing to do would be for B to chip in at least a little bit.

If B was the one who promised the kid a new ipod I think A and B should split the cost equally.
posted by lilac girl at 8:41 AM on April 5, 2008 [1 favorite]

Parent B does not exist in this equation. Parent A bought an item and lost it (since you say the child is not at fault then Parent A must take full responsibility for the loss of the item and the child becomes irrelevant too)

If it had been lost on Parent B's time then that is slightly more complicated. I disagree with iconomy that the value of the item is irrelevant. If Parent A has forced into Parent B's care an item of significant value that Parent B could not afford to (or would be significantly disadvantaged) replace then Parent A needs to take some responsibility for the loss of the item because Parent A put Parent B into that situation (assuming it was a suprise gift rather than a joint decision but paid for by A)
posted by missmagenta at 9:56 AM on April 5, 2008 [1 favorite]

I think if Parent A was careless and lost is then A should replace it, but if it was just one of those would've happened regardless of which parents was there I think you both should split it. While I think Parent B would have a case for saying you lost it on your time, tough luck, I think if it was just bad luck it would be a nice gesture to split the cost.
posted by whoaali at 10:12 AM on April 5, 2008

Be sure it is really lost first. My child's shuffle "gets lost" about every 3 or 4 weeks. The first few times were full of angst and grand drama but it turned up. Now we know that it will always turn up. At least it has so far. Might save you some trouble to be sure it is lost for good.
posted by pearlybob at 10:23 AM on April 5, 2008

Caring for kids is hard. Hypervigilence is hard. Sometimes things get lost. If the iPod is important and must be replaced, I would split the cost (or divide however the legal papers say). Sort of like -- when the child's clothes get worn out, they get replaced and the parents share the cost.

FWIW, I have a disabled kid who lost two iPods. (He's also lost or broken at least five or six cell phones.) I've stopped replacing anything, whether cell phone or iPod. But the iPod wasn't *that* important to him, it was just a toy he liked.
posted by ClaudiaCenter at 11:25 AM on April 5, 2008

Just because an item is lost on one parent's "watch" (i.e., while the child is in that parent's custody), that doesn't necessarily mean that that parent caused the loss. The child could, hypothetically, have trouble keeping track of things because of habits learned from the other parent. Or not.

As for who's responsible for replacing it: I say no one. If one or both parents want to give the child another iPod, that's a gift. I don't think it's necessarily a given that any person is entitled to an iPod, even if they had one before. Sometimes we lose things, and sometimes we are lucky enough to have people take care of us in a way that includes replacing things we've lost.
posted by amtho at 12:28 PM on April 5, 2008 [1 favorite]

This is a fascinating thread, because everything depends on whether it's a given in your family that the child's stuff shall be replaced when lost, and that there is always a guilty parent who will be identified and will be responsible for the replacement. And how can we know that; I don't see that in what you've told us.

If so, then I suppose A should replace the thing that he's supposedly liable for losing, under the assumptions you've given us.

If not, then the new iPod is independent of the lost iPod. It's a new gift, not tied to any occasion, but being given just to be nice. A can give it; or A and B can give it together--whatever.

I hope you'll "favorite" one of the answers above so we know what you've decided.
posted by JimN2TAW at 3:43 PM on April 5, 2008

The child is not at all responsible for the iPod. He doesn't have the mental capacity for it, but his life is very much enhanced by having the iPod.

If he/she doesn't have the capacity to be responsible for an expensive item, then he/she isn't ready to own one in the first place. And frankly, kids' lives are potentially very much enhanced by just about every possion they have; kids are pretty easy that way.

IMO this is entirely between Parent A and the child, however. And if I was Parent B, I'd be pretty uncomfortable knowing that if the kid lost an important item (which I had no say in giving to him/her) on my watch that I might be considered responsible.
posted by [NOT HERMITOSIS-IST] at 3:59 PM on April 5, 2008

Not enough information. If there is any fault, i.e., Parent A didn't lock the car doors, then the answer is obvious. But if it was totally random, i.e., temporary wormhole opened, ipod accidentally warped to Galaxy Foo, then the parents talk and say, "Can you help replace the beloved ipod? I'm broke this month," and "Well, I can contribute, but only half; my car needs tires." You will have many more of these conversations, and your child will benefit if you learn to do it well.
posted by theora55 at 5:11 PM on April 5, 2008

Mod note: few comments removed - this is not a referendum on "should a kid have an ipod?" or "what MP3 player should my kid have?"
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:05 AM on April 6, 2008

Response by poster: So, what ultimately happened: Parent A said they couldn't afford to replace it right now (Child has had Parent B's iPod in the meantime) and could Parent B please buy it. Which Parent B has done. Parent A, never offered and will never pay a dime toward this one, my prediction.
posted by Jazz Hands at 2:35 PM on April 9, 2008