What ever you do don’t let the caller know that its bothering you. If they have any hint that what they are doing is bothering you than they will continue their mission. It could be a person who dislikes you for what ever reason. If the calls get out of hand than you may want to let the authorities know what’s going on. Any call that is threatening definitely should be reported. It is best to try and block the calls but if this is not possible just simply ignore them altogether. In some cases the person may resort to other methods of getting your attention.

Annoying calls are geared to simply annoy you enough to pull your hair. You are the center of the person’s day. They have nothing better to do but get under your skin. Unwanted calls are a big throne in one’s side but something can be done about even if the law has to handle it.

I would like to start off this article with why cell phones can be useful at times.

It was the 4th of July, 1998, and several of us were at the Alameda County Fair. The whole place turned suddenly into a riot scene because of two gang members fighting over a Tweety bird at a game booth. Evidently, it was the last Tweety bird and some people consider that enough reason to whip out an automatic and start shooting randomly into a crowd. The effect of this was a stampede. For about two hours, guns and M-80s went off all over the fair crowds, people were pushed down and robbed. It was not a pretty sight and there was only one road to get out. Needless to say, traffic was fairly grid-locked. But, many of us were able to contact each other with our cell phones to be sure our friends were OK. Fortunately, none of my friends were injured. (From http://www.madknight.com/pamela/cell_phone.htm)

After you read this story you are probly asking yourself “Is the author purposeful trying to make cellphone sound great”. No im not trying to make you think that but I just want you to know that cellphone can be useful.

But cellphones can also have a tragic side. In one example a accident in the state of Utah. 2 people where killed because of a cellphone related accident. Here are some facts about cellphone related accidents. These facts are brought to you from (http://www.edgarsnyder.com/car-accident/cell-phone/statistics.html)

• In 2009, 5,474 people were killed in the U.S. because of accidents that involved distracted driving. Another 448,000 were injured.
• Of the 5,474 killed because of distracted driving, 995 involved reports of a cell phone as a factor. However, the number of fatalities caused by cell phone use could be much higher. For those who were injured, 24,000 involved reports of cell phone use as a distraction.
• The under-20 age group had the highest percentage of distracted drivers; 16% of drivers under 20 years old involved in fatal crashes were distracted while driving.
• The 30- to 39-year-old age group had the highest percentage of cell phone use in fatal crashes.
• More people are driving while distracted when they are involved in fatal crashes. The percentage of fatalities associated with distracted drivers increased from 10% in 2005 to 16% in 2009.
• In 2009, 867 fatal crashes were reported to have involved cell phones as a means for driver distraction (18% of all fatal distracted-driving crashes).
• People driving light trucks and motorcyclists had the highest percentage of total drivers reported as distracted at the time of fatal crashes (12% each).
• A teen driver riding with one other passenger doubles the risk of being involved in a fatal car crash. With two or more passengers, the risk increases to five times as likely.
• Research reveals that 46% of drivers under 18 admit to texting while driving. Driver distraction is a factor in 25- to 50% of all car accidents, with 61% of teen drivers admitting to risky driving habits.
• In 2009, the South had the highest percentage of cell phone use while driving at 6%. The Northeast came in at 4%.

So know it is your choice are Cellphones really worth it?

Using a mobile phone for more than 10 years increases the risk of getting brain cancer, according to the most comprehensive study of the risks yet published.

The study  which contradicts official pronouncements that there is no danger of getting the disease found that people who have had the phones for a decade or more are twice as likely to get a malignant tumour on the side of the brain where they hold the handset.

The studies confirm that cell and cordless phone microwave can:

Damage nerves in the scalp

Cause blood cells to leak hemoglobin

Cause memory loss and mental confusion

Cause headaches and induce extreme fatigue

Create joint pain, muscle spasms and tremors

Create burning sensation and rash on the skin

Alter the brain’s electrical activity during sleep

Induce ringing ! in the ears, impair sense of smell

Precipitate cataracts, retina damage and eye cancer

Open the blood-brain barrier to viruses and toxins

Reduce the number and efficiency of white blood cells

Stimulate asthma by producing histamine in mast cells

Cause digestive problems and raise bad cholesterol levels

Stress the endocrine system, especially pancreas, thyroid, ovaries, testes.

The scientists who conducted the research say using a mobile for just an hour every working day during that period is enough to increase the risk  and that the international standard used to protect users from the radiation emitted is not safe and needs to be revised.                                                                                                            

They conclude that caution is needed in the use of mobile phones and believe children, who are especially vulnerable, should be discouraged from using them at all.

Cancers take at least 10 years  and normally much longer  to develop but, as mobile phones have spread so recently and rapidly, relatively few people have been using them that long.

Official assurances that the phones are safe have been based on research that has, at best, included only a few people who have been exposed to the radiation for long enough to get the disease, and are therefore of little or no value in assessing the real risk.

The new study headed by two Swedes, Professor Lennart Hardell of the University Hospital in Orebro and Professor Kjell Hansson Mild of Umea University, who also serves on the MTHR programme’s management committee goes some way to meeting the deficiency.

The scientists pulled together the results of the 11 studies that have so far investigated the occurrence of tumours in people who have used phones for more than a decade, drawing on research in Sweden, Denmark Finland, Japan, Germany, the United States and Britain. They found almost all had discovered an increased risk, especially on the side of the head where people listened to their handsets.

Five of the six studies of malignant gliomas, cancers of the glial cells that support and protect the nerve cells, found an increased risk. The only one that did not still found an increase in benign gliomas. Four of the five studies that looked at acoustic neuromas  benign but often disabling tumours on the auditory nerve, which usually cause deafness found them. The exception was based on only two cases of the disease, but still found that long-term users had larger tumours than other people.

The scientists assembled the findings of all the studies to analyse them collectively. This revealed that people who have used their phones for a decade or more are 20 per cent more likely to contract acoustic neuromas, and 30 per cent more likely to get malignant gliomas.

The risk is even greater on the side of the head the handset is used: long-term users were twice as likely to get the gliomas, and two and a half times more likely to get the acoustic neuromas there than other people.

The scientists conclude: Results from present studies on use of mobile phones for more than 10 years give a consistent pattern of an increased risk for acoustic neuroma and glioma. They add that “an increased risk for other types of brain tumours cannot be ruled out.

Professors Hardell and Mild have also themselves carried out some of the most extensive original work into tumours among long-term mobile phone users and have come up with even more alarming results. Their research suggests they are more than three times more likely to get malignant gliomas than other people, and nearly five times more likely to get them on the side of the head where they held the phone. For acoustic neuromas they found a threefold and three-and-a-half-fold increased risk respectively.

They have also carried out the only study into the effects of the long-term use of cordless phones, and found this also increased both kinds of tumours. Their research suggests that using a mobile or cordless phone for just 2,000 hours  less than an hour every working day for 10 years  is enough to augment the risk.

Professor Mild told The Independent on Sunday: I find it quite strange to see so many official presentations saying that there is no risk. There are strong indications that something happens after 10 years.He stressed that brain cancers are rare: they account for less than 2 per cent of primary tumours in Britain, though they are disproportionately deadly, causing 7 per cent of the years of life lost to the disease. Every cancer is one too many, he said.

He said he uses a mobile phone as little as possible, and urges others to use hands-free equipment and make only short calls, reserving longer ones for landlines. He also said that mobiles should not be given to children, whose thinner skulls and developing nervous systems make them particularly vulnerable.

The danger may be even greater than the new study suggests for, as Professor Mild says, 10 years is the minimum period needed by cancers to develop. As they normally take much longer, very many more would be likely to strike long-term users after 15, 20 or 30 years which leads some to fear that an epidemic of the disease could develop in the coming decades, particularly among today’s young people.

On the other hand, the professor points out that the amount of radiation emitted by phones has decreased greatly since the first ones came on the market more than a decade ago, which suggests that exposures and risks should also be falling. But he still recommended choosing phones that give out as little radiation as possible (see below), and pointed out that people are now also exposed to many other sources of radiation, such as masts and Wi-Fi systems, though these emit much less than mobile handsets.

Britain’s official Health Protection Agency  which has taken a cautious view of claims that radiation from mobile phones, their masts and Wi-Fi installations can damage health admits that the study may be indicative of a risk, but says that “such analyses cannot be conclusive.

The Mobile Operators Association said: This is not new data for the World Health Organisation and the many independent expert scientific committees who state that there are no established health risks from using mobile phones that comply with international guidelines.

Both sides agree that there is need for more research. Professor Mild said a possible link between mobile phones and Alzheimer’s disease should also be examined, since we have indications that it might be a problem as well as a possible link with Parkinson’s disease, which can’t be ruled out.

In the meantime, the scientists want a revision of the emission standard for mobiles and other sources of radiation, which they describe as inappropriate and not safe. The international standard is designed merely to prevent harmful heating of living tissue or induced electrical currents in the body  and does not take the risk of getting cancer into account.

Professors Hansen and Mild serve on the international BioInitiative Working Group of leading scientists and public health experts, which this summer produced a report warning that the standard was thousands of times too lenient.

The BioInitiative report added: It has been established beyond reasonable doubt that some adverse health effects occur at far lower levels of exposure some at several thousand times below the existing safety limits. It also warned that unless this is corrected there could be “public health problems of a global nature.

Case study: ‘Mobiles are the smoking of the 21st century; they need health warnings’

Neil Whitfield, a 49-year-old father of six, developed an acoustic neuroma in 2001 after years of heavy mobile phone use, on the left side of the head, to which he had held his handset. He says he had no family history of the disease and that when he asked a specialist what had caused it, the doctor had asked him if he used a mobile.

I was on it four hours a day, easily he says. When I held it to my head, I could feel my ear getting warm.

He adds that he completely lost his hearing in his left ear and was off work for 12 months. Unable to go back to his old job in marketing, he became a teacher, suffering a #321;20,000 drop in income.

It has had a devastating effect on my family, he says. Mobile phones are the smoking of the 21st century; they should have health warnings on them. You would never buy a child a pack of cigarettes, but we give them mobiles which could cause them harm.

Warning: your model might be dangerous

Exposure to radiation, shown as Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) levels, varies widely in different models. Manufacturers and the Government have ignored the Stewart report that urges they be clearly marked on phones and boxes. They are thus hard to find, though the Carphone Warehouse catalogue includes them. An easily accessible list of phones and radiation exposures is published in Germany, where low-radiation models, defined as having SAR of 0.6 or under, are encouraged.

   The fact that at least 90% of those 285 million using a mobile cell phone, also use mobile services, this is where the market is huge! A mobile service is products like apps, internet services and many others. The main money maker is those who create apps and sell them to an app store and the store in return sells them to a mobile cell phone user. This market makes not only the creator money but the app store as well.

Image via Wikipedia

   The door of opportunity is open right now for the mobile market. The question is, are you ready to take advantage of this opportunity? Or are you going to wait and see how this market grows? Well, I think right now would be the best time to take this opportunity while the mobile market is a secret and the competition is low. The reason I say this is because once this secret gets out, and you know it will, the market will get huge and the competition will get higher and it will be harder to get the huge profits in the mobile market.

   Do us both a favor and get in this market now and start making these huge profits! The easiest way to get in is to visit my Facebook Fan Page: Mobile Money Secrets then click the “Like” button and become a Fan, then you will get to know all of the secrets and get started before others do. You should act fast on this because I am only sharing these secrets with my fan members and I am only taking a small amount as fans and this is because I want to keep the competition low so my fans and myself can make those huge profits before it does get bigger.

In December 1900, just prior to the start of the 20th century, John Elfreth Watkins published these predictions entitled What May Happen in the Next Hundred Years, in the US women’s magazine Ladies Home Journal.  Mr Watkins was a regular writer for an off spin of this journal and, by all accounts he had used his own professional knowledge as well as undertaking more in-depth research.

He started his article with the words, “these prophecies will seem strange, almost impossible” but he was obviously well ahead of his time as at least 10 of his prophecies have come true.

One of the predictions was digital colour photography.  Obviously he couldn’t predict how computers, modern cameras etc would work but he stated that “photographs will be telegraphed from any distance”.  He further went on to state that snapshots would be able to be published an hour later and that photographs will reproduce “all of nature’s colours”. 

At the time he made this prediction, cameras and photography themselves were in their infancy and it must have been mind boggling to think that colour photographs could be reproduced, so I can’t imagine how awe inspiring it would be to think that, during the lifetime of the readers great great grandchildren, these colour photographs would find their way around the world within hours!

Another of his predictions was rather more personal and not technologically based.  He stated that Americans would be taller by 1″ to 2″.  Apparently, back in 1900 the average American male was about 5′5″ to 5′6″ (around 1.7m) but by 2000 this had increased to 5′7″ to 5′8″ (around 1.75m).

The next prediction Mr Watkins got right was the invention of the mobile (cell) phone.  He stipulated that “wireless telephone and telegraph circuits will span the world” and that “a husband in the middle of the Atlantic will be able to converse with his wife sitting in her boudoir in Chicago.  We will be able to telephone China as readily as we now talk from New York to Brooklyn”.

Once again, the telephone was a new invention, very few people had been able to afford to have one installed and it would be a further 15 years before the first call was made from one side of the US to the other so the idea of wireless calls offshore and from one country to another must have seemed like madness!

He predicted that pre-cooked meals would be delivered to your door!  In Mr Watkins words “ready-cooked meals will be bought from establishments similar to our bakeries of today”.  This could of course mean that you could just walk into a food shop and take away a meal – much like our pizza/Chinese takeaways, although it seems that Mr Watkins did actually expect the food to be delivered to your door on plates and then these would be returned to the “establishment” to be washed.  In essence, he has got our takeaway delivery system bang to rights.  How many of us order in a pizza, Chinese, or Indian takeaway?  And over here in the UK even fish & chip shops are now joining the fray – we often get our haddock or plaice and chips with mushy peas, onion rings and curry sauce delivered via a local shop just by placing an order online!

Another prediction which was spot on was that “winter will be turned to summer and night into day by the farmer, with electric wires under the soil and large gardens under glass”.

Obviously large glass houses were already in existence in 1900 but the use of electricity to provide out of season fruit and veg was something new.  Thanks to electrically heated glass houses we’re now able to enjoy fruit and veg out of season with no major ecological problems as they no longer have to be flown swiftly from one country to another to ensure their freshness.  Unfortunately though the electric wires under the soil doesn’t yet seem to have caught on although I suspect there are some farmers or horticulturalists out there who have rigged up such a system.

Another of Watkins predictions was for TV.  I know there had been quite a few predictions going around since time immemorial relating to this phenomenon but this prediction was spookily close to what we know about the workings of the TV today!  Watkins stated that “man will see around the world.  Persons and things of all kinds will be brought within focus of cameras connected electrically with screens at opposite ends of circuits thousands of miles at a span”.  That’s one of the closest definitions I’ve seen as to the development of the old goggle box!

We’ve all heard about Leonardo da Vinci’s so-called prediction regarding military tanks but Watkins prediction has advanced on that.  He states that “huge forts on wheels will dash across open spaces at the speed of express trains of today [1900]“.

One of the predictions that I wouldn’t even have considered was that fruit would be larger.  He considered that strawberries as large as apples would exist in the 21st century.  Admittedly the strawberries we have here aren’t quite as big as apples, but I do find that they’re much larger than they were when I was a child and, over the century, a lot of research has been put into making fruit and veg larger.  Unfortunately, it seems that a lot of the flavour has now gone out of the newer varieties compared to the smaller ones.  It also seems that today we have an obsession for perfectly shaped fruit and veg!  What’s wrong with a knobbly turnip or a bent banana?  Bearing in mind we seem to have a lot of starving people in the world, I cannot see the logic in just casting nature’s misshapes aside.  I grow veg in my garden and I haven’t been poisoned yet by eating a runner bean that’s a bit curly or a potato that’s not entirely ovoid but has a few lumps, bumps and warts on it!  Nor do I subscribe to our “super chefs” over here casting the skin and seeds of tomatoes to one side.

Another prediction was uncannily true.  He basically envisioned  “the Acela Express” (which runs between Boston and Washington).  Watkins stated that by the 21st century trains would run two miles to the minute normally and express trains one hundred and fifty miles an hour.  The Acela Express can reach speeds of up to 150 miles an hour. 

And over here in the UK we’ve possibly got the HS2 speed train on the horizon once the government can convince the populace it’s a good thing.  Unfortunately the route for this train will take a huge chunk out of our beautiful landscape and is going to cost god knows how many million pounds to actually get up and running.  As you can imagine, it’s going down here like a lead balloon!  Firstly because of the environmental disturbance, secondly because of its noise and upset to local inhabitants and thirdly the amount of tax payers’ money which is going to be wasted when so many people in the UK are struggling to make ends meet due to the recession.  I can see the logic for such a train in a large country like the US but I’m sure it can’t be necessary on a little island like the UK!

I understand from the BBC website that Watkins also foresaw the invention of central heating and air conditioning, cheap cars; average life expectancy to rise to 50 (although I’m sure his calculations are a little on the low side there! – nonetheless life expectancy has of course increased); free university education; and refrigerating food for transportation.

However, like most people who make predictions, Watkins obviously made a couple of cock ups!  He considered that the letters C, X and Q would no longer be necessary  in our alphabet.  I just hope that no-one takes up the challenge of bringing this about as I’d be well and truly stuffed as a work from home typist!!!

Another most definite boo-boo was that everybody would be walking 10 miles a day.  I suspect Watkins would be horrified to learn that most of us can’t even manage to walk one mile a day let alone 10!  This is in evidence in our small village.  Young mums who could walk to the local schools in less than five minutes actually get their cars out to deliver their kids!  My partner and I enjoy walking out in the country and often go for a 30-40 minute walk to pick up a loaf of bread and a few lighter food items from our local village shop, but again, most of our younger mums will take the car out rather than put feet to tarmac!

Watkins also thought that there would be no more cars in large cities.  To some degree, he would have been correct if he’d applied this theory to the UK as we are now discouraged to take vehicles into the city. 

Car parks are prohibitively expensive in our multi storey parks and spaces in our open air, ground level car parks are slowly being reduced.  Instead, we have Park and Ride bus systems set up on the outskirts of cities.  We drive the car to the huge Park and Ride car parks which, in our area, are interspersed with wonderful landscape gardens to encourage wildlife.  We then buy a very inexpensive bus ticket.  We have three options; one for a single person, one for a couple and one for a family.  These buses run very regularly so you don’t need to stand … you just wait for the next bus to come along.  The buses stick to bus lanes and don’t stop for pick ups between the Park and Ride and the city centre so it’s quick, efficient, comfortable and cheap now to get from A to B!

The other prediction which sounds wonderful but most certainly hasn’t manifested itself is that, by the 21st century mosquitoes, house flies and cockroaches would have been exterminated.  I suspect a lot of us would be glad to see the back of these bugs but, when I considered the wider impact, I came to the conclusion it would NOT be a good idea.  We all know that humans are keen to eradicate the nasty parts of life and nurture the nicer things, but in reality, if we eradicated these insects, in all likelihood it would have a knock on effect on wildlife in general.  I’m strongly of the opinion that humans have dabbled too much with nature over the years and it’s been seriously damaging to our environment and ultimately this will affect humans too!  We may think ourselves more intelligent than our animal friends, but sometimes I do wonder – animals get on with what they’re designed to do but we seem to feel it’s our right to hatch, match and despatch our fellow earth creatures as if we’re gods!

So here you have it – not only have I given you some 100 year old predictions which have come true but I’ve also had the opportunity to vent my spleen!!  Two articles for the price of one!!!

A few weeks ago I went into my local Verizon store to make a few changes to my account.  Upon making these changes I asked the person behind the counter how this was going to affect my bill.  I was told it would make my bill go up a “few dollars”.  Because I am on a fixed budget right now I asked for and was given an exact number, or so I thought.  Yesterday I was in shock when I opened my emailed bill and saw that it was quite a few dollars more than I was told!

The first thing I do when there is an issue with a bill is to call the company.  I quickly grabbed my cell phone and got a hold of a representative.  After explaining to him that my bill was a good $70 more than I was expecting I asked for an explanation.  Of course it took me a little while to understand the logistics of how they do their billing but in the end I was told that I was billed for the difference from the day my account was changed until the billing cycle started again, then I was pre-billed for the following month.  My issues were not in how they billed, but in what they were billing me so I asked why my bill seemed so high.  This is when I was told that I was basically lied to when making the changes to my account!

When I first made the decision to make changes to my account it was for the overall purpose of saving money. Getting a bill that was way higher than I thought it would be was deeply upsetting.  However, I was more upset by the fact that I wasn’t told that my bill would be higher because they were adding to my services; something I did not agree to or even knew they were doing.  As far as I knew the only changes to my account were the ones I had set in motion.  Boy was I wrong.

In the end I am stuck paying for this bill and will be receiving credits and adjustments for next month.  After having explained my frustrations to Verizon I am getting a credit that I was not expecting however, it does little to calm my nerves at the moment.  As far as I am concerned I should not have to worry about being lied to when making purchases but in the future I will make sure I get it in writing  and that I read the fine print!

I am bringing this up because I am sick and tired of

people calling me on my phone, or even my work,

who don’t know how to ask for, who they want.

1.  When you call to speak to someone, you state

who you are.   Example:  Hi, this is Mary, Bill’s friend from school.  I am looking

to speak with Bill if he is in?

If this is a business call.  Example:  Good morning, this is Ms. Green calling

from your local Communications Company.  I am looking to speak with Mr. Bill Brown

if he is in?

We do not call and ask the person who answered the phone, who are you.

The person who answers the phone has done just that, answered the phone.

It is up to the person who has made the call to say, who they are and what they want/

who they want, not the other way around!

In a time when we are transitioning from production to technology in all areas of

the workforce in the United States and those we partner with across the globe.  I think

a little Phone Etiquette should be automatic. 

by:  Tyna Braxton

Do you have a mobile or cell phone?  You are far from alone because more people are spending more time on their mobile devices than ever before.  If you spend time on the on your mobile device you are one of four billion such phones in use – and more than 25 percent of them are smart phones.  In fact, by 2014 it is projected that mobile Internet use will overtake desktop Internet usage. 

In 2011 more than 50 percent of all Internet searches were done from a mobile device (cell phone, tablet, etc.).

Television on Your Phone?

Do you watch television on your mobile phone?  You are among the 86 percent of mobile device users who do so.

In addition 200 million, or one-third, of all mobile device users are accessing Facebook from their mobile unit.  In fact, 91 percent of all mobile Internet use is for social-related activity.

The way people are using their mobile devices is also changing and expanding.  Almost 30 percent of users are utilizing the relatively new function of scanning tags in order to get coupons they can use on items they are purchasing.

Phone Use Greater Than Time Eating

All this mobile use is adding up in terms of time.  On average in the U.S. alone, mobile users spend 2.7 hours a day socializing via their device.  Putting that in context, that is twice the amount of time they spend eating and more than one-third of the time they spend sleeping every day.

The top uses of cell phones, as of 2011, are: games (61%), checking the weather (55%), searching (50%), social networking (49%), listening to music (42%), news (36%), entertainment (33%), dining/looking for eateries (25%), and video (21%).

For specific social media the statistics are even more amazing.  More than one-third of Facebook’s 600 million users use Facebook Mobile.  For Twitter’s 165 million users half use Twitter Mobile.  At YouTube there are more than 200 million views per day on mobile devices.

Women Most Active Users

Who uses mobile devices more often?  Women in the 35 to 54 age group are the most active users of mobile devices for socialization.

So, the use of mobile devices for all sorts of purposes is continuing to grow and at a rapid rate. They may one day be so popular that their use exceeds all other computer uses.  If you’re not using one now, you may soon find yourself doing so – or looking at other devices like desktops and laptops in a museum.

Click here for more articles by The Writin’ Cowboy.

A start-up based in San Diego, California wants to put one of these in your local grocery store. It’s an called an ecoATM, and it allows you to recycle your old cell phones or MP3 Players for cash or store credit right on the spot. A prospective sale goes like so: first, the user provides a thumbprint and driver’s licence or state-issued ID (this is to crack down on fraud and theft), and then the machine uses artificial intelligence to identify and appraise the phone. Then, the ecoATM will do a usb scan of the device. Once the price is determined, if the user wants to recycle/sell their device, he or she has a chance to make a donation to charity.

Interesting stuff.

A lot of parents these days eventually just give in to their child’s begging to have a phone. After all, all of their child’s friends have phones, and they don’t want their child to be left out. And what if they need to call their parents while at school? Better make sure your child has the newest iPhone.

Never give in to your child’s begging to have something just because their friends have one. That isn’t the type of lesson you want to teach your kids. They don’t need a phone just because their friends are all texting during class.

You child doesn’t need a phone while they are at school, either. When I was a kid, if I had to get in touch with my parents, I went to the office and asked to use the school phone. Even if you tell your child to use their phone only for emergencies and to keep it turned off otherwise, they will still be using it to text during class. They will be texting instead of paying attention in class. They may also be tempted to use it to cheat on tests.

There is also the problem of sexting. If your child has a phone, they may be tempted to send inappropriate messages or pictures. Even if you think your child is smarter than that, they may still be on the receiving end of such content.

Your child doesn’t really need a cell phone until they are 16 years old and are driving (and have a job to pay for their phone and car). Once they start driving, it is important that they have a way to contact you if they have trouble on the road. But until then, there is no reason to give your teen or child a cell phone.

What is Sexting, Part 1: Why is It a Problem?

Sexting Part 2: What Can Parents Do About It?

What Should You Do About Harassment Via Text Messaging?

Get Paid to Write!