> Your example implicitly means that you do agree someone needs to be made liable for the child through 'obligatory supervision' - because if you don't do that, you will be accountable.
Sorry, I only tried to describe the legal situation in Germany. 'Aufsichtspflicht' is a legal term, and its translation is 'obligatory supervision'. The law says that parents are responsible for controlling their children in a sane way. I.e. your child can walk or bike to school unattended, but if you give her dangerous substances to play with and turn your back, you are held liable.
> Your argument seems to point more to: How do you define someone as liable and how do you enforce it?
That's what the courts do. As far as I know they use common sense and social norms to determine how much you have to guard your children.
Sorry, I only tried to describe the legal situation in Germany. 'Aufsichtspflicht' is a legal term, and its translation is 'obligatory supervision'. The law says that parents are responsible for controlling their children in a sane way. I.e. your child can walk or bike to school unattended, but if you give her dangerous substances to play with and turn your back, you are held liable.
> Your argument seems to point more to: How do you define someone as liable and how do you enforce it?
That's what the courts do. As far as I know they use common sense and social norms to determine how much you have to guard your children.