parents

Donating cash to children is exempt from personal income tax for parents. It is not free for children

by

Young people do not have it easy to get ahead in a context of very tight salaries and with him housing prices skyrocketed. Therefore, helping children or a family member financially becomes the natural impulse. However, this willingness to help may have tax consequences What is important to know before making the transfer. In a binding query Addressed to the General Directorate of Taxes (DGT), a body dependent on the Treasury, a person raised the possibility of helping his family financially through a cash donation. The consultation made it abundantly clear: anyone who donates cash has nothing to fear on their tax return. The same cannot be said about the person who receives it. ​What the Treasury says about the donor’s personal income tax. The General Directorate of Taxes responded to a person who wanted to donate cash to his mother. The DGT pulled the file and argued its response in a previous binding consultation, in which a father raised the tax consequences of donating cash to his children. The Treasury’s response establishes that “for the donation of money, no capital gain or loss will be computed for the donor,” which implies that on the part of the person who gives that money there is nothing to declare or pay in the Income Tax. The technical reasoning is quite logical and simple. When money is donated, there is no difference between the value at which it was acquired and the value at which it is transmitted, so there is no alteration in the donor’s assets that justifies paying taxes on it, as established in article 33.1 of the Law on Personal Income Tax. When the gift is not money, the story changes. The organization itself takes advantage of the consultation to remember that the exemption from personal income tax taxation Applies exclusively to cash donations. That means that if parents They donate a home to their children that they bought 20 years ago for 100,000 euros, and that at the time of donation its value is 200,000 euros, must pay personal income tax for that increase of 100,000 euros in its value between the date of purchase and the donation. The same occurs with shares or other assets with market value that may increase in value between the purchase price and the donation price. The most curious thing is that this principle does not apply in the same way if that same property had lost value since its purchase, the donor would not be able to deduct that loss. Children do pay the Gift Tax. It should be noted that the fact that the father does not pay personal income tax for that donation does not mean that the transfer of assets has no consequences for the person who receives it. The child who receives the money is obliged to declare the donation and settle the Inheritance and Donation Tax. This tax falls on the person who receives the donation, not on the donor. The amount to be paid for the child or family member depends on factors such as the amount received, the degree of relationship and, above all, the autonomous community where the recipient resides for tax purposes. Depending on what requirements are met, the amount to pay may be close to zero euros, but it is necessary to complete the procedure. If the donation is not declared within the established period, the Treasury may impose penalties and interest. A tax that depends on the communities. The Inheritance and Donation Tax is partially transferred to the autonomous communities, which means that each community sets its own bonuses, reductions and tax rates. This generates very notable differences between paying this tax in one community or another. Madrid and Andalusia, for example, apply a 99% bonus on donations between parents and children, which in practice means that the recipient barely pays taxes when making this type of donation. At the opposite extreme, communities such as Catalonia or the Valencian Community have more demanding tax systems, with progressive rates and fewer bonuses. A particularly striking case is that of Extremadura, which has extended the exemption up to 200,000 euros in donations for children to buy their first home. In Xataka | The Great Wealth Transfer: the movement from boomers to millennials that will transfer millions between generations Image | Pexels (Kaboompics.com)

Living for free in your parents’ house does not imply a donation of the home

by

He house price It is one of the main obstacles to the emancipation of young people in Spain. According to data According to the Spanish Youth Council, only 15.2% of young people can afford to live outside the family home. Of them, 57.9% do so in rented apartments and a third of these young people share a flat with other young people to be able to bear the expenses. In this context, it is not strange to find people over 30 years old living with their parents. However, according to have confirmed the Ministry of Finance to VerifyRTVEit is false that living for free in your parents’ home, or in “any property of your parents”, can be considered “as a donation”. The Treasury makes it clear: there is no donation. Both from the Ministry of Finance like from the union of Technicians of the Ministry of Finance (GESTHA) point out that there is no tax or legal change that penalizes children for residing in the family home. Sources from the Ministry of Finance confirmed to damn.es that “there have been no legal changes or changes in the orientation of administrative actions since the IRPF existed, nor has it ever been considered a fiscal risk.” Carlos Cruzado, president of the GESTHA union, explained to RTVE that no taxes or duties apply additional taxes for the simple fact that an adult shares a home with his or her parents. Donation is a change of ownership, not use. The reason why no charge is made is because, simply, when a child lives with his or her parents, no transfer of assets occurs. The consensual use that is made of it changes, not the ownership. This change of use between family members without financial compensation does not fit into any of the assumptions of the Inheritance and Donation Taxso neither parents nor children they must pay that tax. The professor of Financial Law Rosa María Galán pointed to damn.es that, in the case of children without economic resources to survive on their own, the article 142 of the Civil Code obliges parents to cover the support, housing, clothing and medical care of their children. There is no need to argue for free coexistence since providing it is a legal obligation. It even applies to second homes. This same logic applies even when parents and children do not live in the same property, but, for example, the parents live in the primary home, and the children in a second residence owned by the parents. According to Cruzado, the Treasury “understands that there may be a free transfer and does not allocate a return at market value.” In this case, the parents are taxed the same as if the home were empty due to the imputation of real estate income in personal income tax, the same obligations that already exist. for having a second residence without regular use. In this case, the owner of the home must pay a tax of 2% of the cadastral value of the property, and in some cases is reduced to 1.1%. That is, what is taxed is the condition of second home ownership, not the fact that children live in the home or not. The transfer of use is not a donation: the distinction that changes everything. As and as explained José María Salcedo, managing partner of the tax firm Salcedo Tax Litigation to Idealistiche article 6.5 of the Personal Income Tax Law establishes a presumption of onerousness. This means that the Treasury tends to assume that any transfer has a price. However, this presumption admits evidence to the contrary, and the most common instrument to prove it is the bailment contracta document that formalizes the loan of the property without financial consideration and that, according to Cruzado, the Treasury “does not usually carry out these checks”, although it serves as a guarantee to justify “free of charge the right to use someone else’s property for a certain period of time.” In Xataka | There is a less painful solution so that an inheritance does not become a ruin for the heirs: renounce it Image | Pexels (Kampus Production)

In their obsession with overprotecting them, parents are depriving their children of something very important: frustration.

by

We live in the era of hyperparentingsince never before had there been so much information about parenting, and paradoxically, never had so much guilt been felt. The fact that some parents are terrified of giving a bad answer, a separation or too much screen time will irreversibly ruin their children. But the truth is that we are overprotecting children. An expert. Faced with this anxiety, child psychologist Ana Aznarauthor of ‘Educating also means saying no’proposes a paradigm shift: realistic parenting. His thesis is that overprotection is creating a generation with low tolerance for frustration and that parents need to regain authority (not authoritarianism). And given this, science has a lot to say about the true weight that parental decisions have in children’s adult lives. The myth of determinism. One of the greatest sources of anxiety in these cases may be the idea that what happens in childhood is an immutable destiny. But this is not entirely the case. A classic study that followed thousands of people born in 1958 and 1970 pointed out that all childhood variables together, such as economic status, family traits or health, only explain between 2.8% and 6.8% of the variability in life satisfaction at age 30. This does not mean that childhood does not matter, of course it does. The evidence indicates that human development is cumulative and plastic, causing subsequent factors to take a greater step in the adult phase. With this we we refer to adolescencethe first social relationships or the work environment that have great weight. Paradox of overprotection. Although the pretext, which is basically to avoid the child’s suffering, the truth is that this style of education has important side effects. This is something that has been validated by sciencewhich found that parental overprotection is positively associated with internalizing problems such as anxiety and depression. The mechanism is perverse in this case, because by “clearing the path” of obstacles, we prevent the child from Build your frustration tolerance. Recent studies link intrusive parental overinvolvement with less autonomy and poorer emotional adjustment in adulthood. This means that making a child never get frustrated by being in a constant cloud makes the adult break down at the first “no” in real life like at work. The problem of screens. Currently one of the big questions is when to give the mobile phone to children for the first time. Science suggests that the important thing is to offer it but educate about its use from the first moment. A study on the Canadian population showed a clear relationship here: exceeding 2 hours a day of recreational time in front of screens is associated with a greater probability of anxiety and psychosocial difficulties. The real thing. However, the key nuance provided by organizations such as the American Pediatric Association is displacement. The problem is not always the pixels themselves, but what the child stop doing by looking at the screen: sleeping less, moving less and socializing less face to face. The strategy backed by science is not just to “remove your cell phone”, but to “fill your life” with alternatives such as sports, sleep or free play and monitor the quality of the content, rather than obsessing only with the stopwatch. The conflict. Something that can be deeply internalized in families is that witnessing a divorce within the family destroys a child. But the reality is that the most important thing is the climate of coexistence as a study that analyzed hundreds of families points out. This clearly showed that the quality of the relationship between parents, such as support or the absence of hostile conflict, is a much more reliable predictor of child well-being than whether or not they live with both biological parents. In this way, a home with two parents in constant war is, according to PMC data, a more toxic environment for the development of children than having a single-parent family where there is calm. Images | Christian Mai In Xataka | Those born between 1950 and 1970 have a psychological advantage over other generations: they are entering their “peak”

Imoo turned the children’s smartwatch into its own genre. Now all the parents who bought it are stuck

by

According to CounterPoint Research estimate for the global smartwatch market in 2025… Apple grew 12%. Samsung fell 6%. Imoo grew by 17%. Action replay: A Chinese brand that exclusively sells children’s watches is growing more than Appleand definitely more than Samsung, which is going down. Imoo, what The year has already started growing in quotaalready has 7% of the global smartwatch market. And it doesn’t really compete against the Apple Watch Ultra or the current Galaxy Watch: compete against the anguish of not knowing where your child is when he leaves school. Or rather: against the fear of not knowing if one day something happens. Counterpoint Research projects that the global smartwatch market will grow 7% in 2025 after first falling in 2024. That rebound is partly explained by Apple launching the cheap SE 3 and recovering after seven consecutive quarters of declines. But there is another factor: China went from 25% global share in 2024 to 31% in 2025. And within that jump, Imoo has a specific role that perhaps we are not looking at closely enough. Huawei is reinforcing its focus on health and sports, Apple maintains its inertia, Xiaomi focuses on the watch as part of a domestic ecosystem… and Imoo has turned parental fear into a product category. Their watches have GPS, calls, SOS button or alerts when the child leaves an area geofenced by his parents. As a watch it is not very smart and perhaps fits better in the category of surveillance and emergency aid device. Imoo hasn’t invented parental fear, but it has built a great machine to monetize it. Besides, It is a device that creates functional dependency: Once a parent puts it on their child’s wrist, they get used to the peace of mind it provides. So it is difficult not to renew it when the child stamps it or when it becomes obsolete. This success of Imoo goes beyond technology: when you grow 17% a year selling this type of watches, you do not measure adoption, but rather the number of parents who have decided that the anxiety that would cause them not knowing where their child is (understandable, of course) is worse than the inconvenience of constantly tracking them. Once you cross that threshold, there is no turning back. Previous generations had opaque spacesmoments of disappearance for a few hours before returning to dinner. These spaces are closed with this type of products, colorful and gamified, with a branding questionable but an unquestionable commercial success. Parents do not feel that they “control”, but rather that they protect. And kids don’t feel tracked, at least until they get acne and the bomb goes off, until then they just feel like they have a cool watch. And there is an advantage for parents: if suddenly almost all of your child’s classmates have one, the fact that your child does not have one becomes an anomaly. Imoo’s 7% share (and counting) measures how many children are growing up knowing that their parents can track them at any time. It measures a generation that normalizes permanent connectivity as a default state from the age of six. Counterpoint speaks of the smart watch market with “China-driven growth” and “different strategies to sustain the engagement of the consumer”, but it does not mention that One of those strategies is to redefine a part of childhood. The next son will also wear the watch. And the next one too. Imoo doesn’t need to grow faster than Apple to win. It just requires that each generation of parents find it more unthinkable than the previous one to leave a child unaccounted for. In Xataka | After almost a decade with the Apple Watch, I have switched to a Garmin. And I understood what I was missing Featured image | Xataka

In Spain, more and more parents go with their children to complain to the university. In Tokyo they have “monster parents”

by

The image was so utterly disconcerting which didn’t take long to go viral. A few weeks ago the University of Granada it was news because a vice dean of the Faculty of Educational Sciences hung a poster reminding that teachers “do not serve parents”, and insisted: “All enrolled students are of legal age.” something similar made by the University of Oviedo, which also hung a similar poster pointing that their students are now adults and the regulations limit the information that the center can give to their parents. The phenomenon is not, however, exclusive to Spain. In Japan, overprotective parents have become such a serious problem that it has forced the authorities to move tab in schools. The goal: protect teachers. New guidelines. That a body like the Tokyo Metropolitan Board of Education publishes guidelines on how schools should act in certain circumstances is nothing new. It is true that these guidelines do not focus on the teaching load, schedules, extracurricular activities or anything that has to do with the education of young people or the organization of the faculty. The objective of the new recommendations of the Council are focused on something else. Basically how teachers should act when they encounter what in Japan they have already started to call (and not without reason) ‘monster parents’overprotective fathers and mothers who do not hesitate to get into fights with teachers, demand accountability and have long discussions about all kinds of issues. But is the problem so serious? It seems so. And there are a couple of studies that help understand it. a survey published in April with some 12,000 public school teachers in Tokyo revealed that 22% claimed to have received “socially questionable” treatment from people outside the school, especially parents. A previous reportfrom just a year ago, prepared by the Japanese Association of Mutual Aid of Public School Teachers, also identified that dealing with students’ parents was a source of stress for teachers. Connected with the karoshi. It’s not just that parents increase teachers’ anxiety. As remember This Week in Asiaeach teacher usually has several classes with dozens of students (about 30), so in the end the meetings and telephone conversations with parents end up becoming an extra workload that lengthens the faculty’s day. Sometimes several hours every week. A recent report on karoshiknown as “death from overwork”, reflects that during the last three years the education sector has been one of those with the highest percentage of personnel who work more than 60 hours per week. They are only surpassed by transportation, logistics and hospitality. “Irrational requests”. Why do they complain? ‘monster parents’? What makes them show up every now and then at their children’s teachers’ offices, send them messages or keep them on the phone for hours? The Japan Times speaks of “irrational requests” related to students who refuse to go to class or have been reprimanded, but other media cite stranger cases. This Week in Asia refers complaints from parents upset because the cherry trees had not bloomed in time for their children’s entrance ceremonies, about the taste of school menus or about insect bites. “There are two types of parents, those who are demanding but kind, who sometimes offer us gifts, and those who seem to always be dissatisfied, no matter what,” says one teacher. Of insects and girlfriends. Tsuji, professor of sociology of culture at Chuo University in Tokyo, recognize their fear that the phenomenon is going beyond schools and reaching faculties. “These young people are in college and yet their parents insist on telling their teachers what they should do,” he says. “The university has received complaints from parents about the quality of the food and one mother called demanding to know why her son had not made new friends.” Not long ago, she herself had to assist a mother who was worried because her university son couldn’t find a girlfriend. “I didn’t know what to answer,” he confesses. Other teacher relates the ordeal that school trips entail. “Parents call or message teachers at midnight or even later to ask what their child needs to bring, where to meet, what time they need to arrive, what they’re going to see, and so on.” The most curious thing, he regrets, is that all this information is given to all students well in advance. putting order. Against this backdrop, the Tokyo Board of Education has issued a series of guidelines for metropolitan centers. The goal? That their teachers know how to act in each case. Your guidelines are clear and simple: meetings with parents will no longer last 30 minutes a week, a maximum of one hour in special cases to prevent them from interrupting the rest of their work. In these meetings there will also be at least two teachers and if the parents insist on meeting with the center, the case will pass from the teachers to the management. From the fourth meeting onwards, other professionals will come into play to address the matter, such as psychologists or even lawyers. Of course, the talks will be recorded and if necessary (if a parent loses his manners) a security company or even the intervention of the police. Because? The big question. What explains the phenomenon of ‘monster parents’? Although in Tokyo the focus has been on schools, not so much on faculties, the backdrop is not different from that of the controversies that have arisen here in Oviedo or Granada: protective parents and the diminished authority of teachers. “This problem has been increasing in recent years,” Tsuji confesses.who remembers that in the middle birth crisis In Japan, parents are invested in the well-being and academic success of their children. Added to this are cultural and social changes, which include the fact that new parents come from educated generations who feel more authorized to deal with teachers. Images | Egor Myznik (Unsplash) and Stephanie Hau (Unsplash) In Xataka | There is a national symbol that Japan has kept unchanged for generations: a very expensive … Read more

That a teenager begins to ‘hate’ his parents is something that is in his brain, and science has already found the pattern

by

If you’re a parent of a teenager, you know: their world revolves around their friends. If you were one of them, you surely remember: parents’ opinion took a backseat. And although it seems that it is a sign of the rebellion that we see normal at this age, the reality is that the guilt is literally found in the brain. The culprit. But when asked what causes this indolence among adolescents? The answer comes from the magnetic resonance imaging that has been applied to the brains of some adolescents. And research shows that, during adolescence, the brain not only changes its interest, but also reconfigures your reward circuits so that the voices of strangers are more gratifying than the voice of one’s own mother. And this is something that explains the fact that adolescents give much more importance to a friend than to their own closest family, and even go so far as to prioritize them above anything else. Although in the end he has a good excuse in his brain systems. The study. To find this out, the researchers didn’t have the teens listen to scolding. They used a more cunning methodology by gathering 46 children and adolescents between 7 and 16 years old who were exposed to listening to recordings of nonsense words such as teebudie-shawlt. The important thing about this investigation was that these meaningless words were spoken by two voices: that of their own mother and that of two women unknown to them. In this way, when the recording was played, the activity of their brains began to be analyzed through functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to see the parts of the brain that were lighting up with each of the voices that were playing. The results. In the youngest children between seven and twelve years old, their mother’s voice caused a party at the reward centers of the brain, specifically in the nucleus accumbens (NAc) and the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC). The interesting thing here is that this activity was much greater than what was felt when hearing the voices of the strangers and it is logical because the mother is the center of her social universe that causes her greater happiness. But things change completely in adolescents between 13 and 16 years old, where these same reward and social evaluation regions showed significantly greater activity for unfamiliar voices than for their own mother’s. In this way, the age that we can consider as a border between them paying attention to their mother and when they are going to completely ignore what they are told will be around 13.5 years. Because. In this case we are not talking about adolescents rejecting their parents, since in a behavioral test they were able to identify mothers’ voices in an almost perfect way. The change is precisely in the valuation of that voice. This neurobiological turn is considered an adaptive process essential for maturity. The teenage brain is being “refreshed” for a new mission: leaving the nest. To prepare for independence, the brain must begin to find new social connections more rewarding. You have to tune in with your companions, future allies and partners. The bibliography. This finding fits with previous models that were made to identify the differentiated stages in social and brain development, where the affective focus passes from the mother to friends and finally to romantic relationships. Recent reviews reaffirm that the reward system in adolescence is especially sensitive to novel social stimuli, and that the maturation of frontostriatal connections modulates these changes. A previous work by the same group had already shown that in childhood the maternal voice has a privileged response in the mesolimbic circuit and the current study extends and completes that model by showing how this pattern is reversed in adolescence. In this way, every time we see a teenager who literally tells his mother that he doesn’t even want to hear her, but spends all day talking to his friends, we already know why: his brain has changed so that he likes it more. Images | Sebastien Mouilleau Amir Hosseini In Xataka | If the question is where to find the time to play sports or learn languages, you have the answer on your mobile

In Galicia some parents educated their young son at home. Now they are condemned for “irresponsible unschooling”

by

He homeschooling It’s news. And it is on account of a sentence issued by a court in Vigo that has decided to impose a fine of just over 2,000 euros (with severe reproach included) on parents who decided to educate their nine-year-old son at home, removing the little one from the school in which he was enrolled for the 2024-2025 academic year. The ruling is interesting not so much for its consequences (the penalty is not high: 1,080 euros per parent) as for its arguments and because it differs from other rulings on the same topic that yes they were acquittal. One moment,homeschooling? The term may seem strange, but it is not new. In fact, it connects with a movement that started in the US in the 70s. He homeschooling It is neither more nor less than an educational option that advocates educating children at home, far from conventional classrooms and schools. Often focusing educational responsibility on parents and those who practice it stand out above all its ability to adapt to the needs of each child, its personalization and flexibility of schedules, content and spaces. How many people practice it? Hard to know. In Spain it is estimated that there are between 2,000 and 4,000 families unschoolers. If we talk about the United States, there are calculations that indicate that 3% of students between five and 17 years old receive training at home. The variety of data is explained by the lack of censuses (case of Spain) and above all because the practice does not have the same lace in all countries. To better understand the regulatory differences, it is good to take a look at the web of Homeschooling. There are nations that clearly prohibit it, others that protect it and then there are cases like Spain, where there are those who consider that home education moves in “a legal ‘gray area’”. Swampy terrain. That is why sentences like the one just handed down by a judge in Galicia arouse so much interest, especially because not all cases end in the same way. What have they judged in Vigo? What the Criminal Court number 1 of Vigo has ruled on is a very specific case: some parents from Gondomar (in Pontevedra) who decided to take their nine-year-old son out of the public school in which he was enrolled last year to educate him at home. The ruling recalls that, despite the Educational Inspection’s resolution denying deschooling and the warning from the Juvenile Prosecutor’s Office, the parents continued with their plans, betting on homeschooling and a personal itinerary. The boy attended an academy for two hours a week, but the bulk of his education depended on the program decided by his parents. And what does the sentence say? The fundamental and key of the sentence, as precise Vigo Lighthouseis the educational bet chosen by parents. The ruling speaks of “flagrant deficiencies”, an educational project that “does not meet the minimum requirements” and “irresponsible unschooling” that compromises the child’s “academic progress” and, ultimately, will condition his life. “In this case, the education provided directly and almost exclusively by the parents, basically based on their own personal criteria and ideas, without an alternative educational method to the minimally solvent official one and without some evaluative objectivity, represents irresponsible unschooling,” the judge warns in his sentence, disclosed by Lighthouse and with a resounding tone. “There is negligence in education and failures in basic care duties.” Why is it important? Where you put the focus. The sentence focuses mainly on these shortcomings and the “irresponsibility” of the child’s family. In fact the ruling insists in which the parents did not even resort to an “alternative external educational system to the official one” and selected the subjects based on “their own criteria”, without any other reference. In practice this translated into training that, in the judge’s opinion“does not meet the minimum requirements established in the regulatory framework of compulsory education.” The minor participated in activities such as bicycle outings, excursions to the forest, sailing with a jet ski, collecting chestnuts or cooking, but he received “basic” skills in fields such as mathematics or language. For example, his parents did not teach him geometry. The expert who was in charge of examining the case in fact noted a “confusion” between the family routine and the school routine and also pointed out the “privatization of socialization” of the child. Does it explain anything else? Yes. The ruling conveys an interesting message. He explains that “home education may not be criminally reprehensible,” but it must meet a series of requirements, guaranteeing that the child will receive “sufficient” training thanks to an educational system that must be “responsible and competent.” In fact, this is not the first ruling issued by the Vigo court on the subject: at the beginning of 2024 spoke about another case involving parents who educated their son at home throughout the 2021-22 academic year. The Prosecutor’s Office found a crime of “family abandonment” (the same one that has been tried now) and requested five months in prison for the parents and six months of disqualification for parental authority. What was the result? On that occasion the judge acquitted them. Although he homeschooling was underlying in both cases, the judge noted clear differences in both cases. In the 2021-2022 report, it concluded that the parents did not show “carelessness” or “carelessness” and carried out “responsible unschooling.” The little boy continued to be educated with official books, he attended various extracurricular activities and the homeschooling It only really lasted one course. In fact, a year later the minor was already attending another center again, where he continued training “with absolute regularity” and obtained good grades. Is it legal or not legal? Europa Press assures that the ruling of the Court of Vigo warns that the homeschooling It is not a legal option in our country and it is “unquestionable” that parents who do not send their children to school violate an obligation contained in the … Read more

2,000 euros fine for the minor’s parents

by

The Spanish Data Protection Agency (AEPD) has imposed the first sanction in Spain for the creation and dissemination of false images generated with artificial intelligence. The parents of a minor have been fined 2,000 euros, reduced to 1,200 for prompt payment, after a case that has set a precedent in the protection of minors’ data in Europe. What has happened. A minor used the ClothOff app to create a fake image of a naked high school classmate. The AI ​​tool takes the victim’s face and superimposes it on an unclothed body, taking into account physical characteristics such as complexion or skin tone. The image was later spread through social networks and messaging groups. The origin of the case. Although the public resolution does not identify the parties involved, the AEPD has confirmed that it is one of the cases that occurred in AlmendralejoBadajoz, in September 2023. Then, it came to light that at least 20 minors had been victims of similar schemes that circulated on the municipality’s cell phones. The images even reached portals such as OnlyFans and pornographic pages, according to the resolution. Why it is important. This is the first time that a data protection authority in the European Union sanctions by spreading a deepfake. The AEPD opened the file ex officio on September 20, 2023, just two days after the case became public, and was able to learn the identity of those responsible thanks to the collaboration with the Prosecutor’s Office. The regulator has acted on the basis that a person’s image is personal data that has reinforced protection when it comes to minors. The debate on the sanction. The amount of the fine has generated some debate. Jorge García Herrero, lawyer and data protection officer, account to El País that “very few risks related to AI cause as much social alarm as the creation of non-consensual sexual deepfakes of minors” and questions whether the sanction is ‘not very exemplary’. On the other hand, the jurist Borja Adsuara, account to the media that this is “a crime against privacy, which goes through criminal proceedings,” and wonders what sense it makes to impose an administrative fine when the case has already been judicially sentenced. The parallel path. This administrative procedure of the AEPD is independent of the criminal process that has already been initiated against those responsible, who were between 12 and 14 years old at the time of the events. In the judicial process, a year of supervised release was imposed on 15 minors for manipulating images of classmates. According to Miriam Al Adib, mother of one of the victims, “there was an exemplary sentence according to which the children are on probation for a year and have to take a training course.” And now what. It is expected that the AEPD will publish more similar fines related to the events in Almendralejo in the coming months, given that there were at least two dozen victims. The resolution exempts the creators of ClothOff from liability, an application designed specifically to generate images of naked women without their consent and which is currently closed. Its creators face a judicial process in the United States. Al Adib warns that these cases represent “a pandemic of tremendous violence” that requires coordinated political strategies and effective protection protocols for victims. Cover image | Swello In Xataka | We already have the first controversy of this Christmas: Coca-Cola has once again made an advertisement using AI

The universities of Oviedo and Granada can no longer handle parents complaining about their children.

by

Spanish education delves into a thorny debate. Prickly and striking. Should parents get involved in their children’s university education? If a father accompanies his 19, 20 or 21-year-old son to school to take care of registration procedures, manage an internship or even review an exam, is he doing him a favor or harming him? It may seem like an artificial controversy, but over the last week the debate has been heated by two viral posters posted by two Spanish universities, that of Granada and that of Oviedo. What signs are those? The first one went viral a few days ago. In fact we talked to you about him a week ago. To make it clear how far the students’ parents can go, Pedro Valdivia, vice dean of the Faculty of Educational Sciences of the University of Granada (UGR), prepared a statement which soon became popular: “The Vice Dean of Practices does not serve parents. All enrolled students are of legal age.” The announcement caught the attention (among others) of the economist Daniel Arias-Arandaprofessor at the UGR, who launched a notice to surfers on their social networks who received hundreds of comments. “When it is necessary to put up this sign at the university, something is wrong. Dear student: solve your own problems and don’t boss around mom and dad. Remember, the age of majority in Spain is 18,” the teacher ironized along with a photo in which you can see the poster of the Vice Dean of Practices hanging with thumbtacks from a cork and with the UGR logo printed in one corner. And the other poster? The other, of very similar tone and background, arrives from the University of Oviedo. The news he advanced it The Commercewhich details that at the end of last year the Faculty of Education and Teacher Training decided to hang a poster in which it basically warns parents that they cannot act on behalf of their adult children: “Article 24. – Access by parents to the academic data of their children. In compliance with the Agreement of March 5, 2020, of the Governing Council of the UO, only students will be served.” And in case there was any doubt, yes, the emphasis is from the Asturian university itself. Your warning is interesting because goes further of the one launched by the UGR and delves into details. Specifically, the Oviedo poster quotes the article on which the university is based and which settles any possible debate: “Academic data (related to enrollment, grades or scholarships of each student) constitute personal data whose processing is subject to the provisions of the General Data Protection Regulation. The communication of personal data relating to students to their parents constitutes data processing.” In order for them to access the information, a “legitimate interest” must be proven. Why so much controversy? Because as remember Arias-Aranda himself, it is usual for students who arrive at universities to be of legal age or even (in the case of those who manage internships) to be in their twenties. Thus the spark arises. Should parents be in charge of procedures such as registration, internships, tutoring and exam reviews of students who are already adults and are one step away from entering the labor market as graduates? Should a parent have access to their child’s records to know what grades they get or whether or not they go to class? As the Asturian faculty recalls, the debate may be settled at a regulatory level by the regulations on student data protection, but… Is it justified for a parent to want to go further? There are those who consider that the answer is yes. “If parents are the ones who pay for their children’s university (they must) be informed of the productivity of that investment,” think a user on social networks. “When the bosses don’t listen to reasons at work, you go back to the union member; when the university staff does the same, can’t the student come with the parents?” posed another days ago on LinkedIn. What do the experts say? Come take a look at the reactions to Arias-Aranda’s publication on networks to verify that the topic generates controversy, but it is not difficult to find experts who warn of the risks of overprotecting children and relieving them of responsibilities, especially when they are already adults. Beatriz Valderrama, psychologist and expert in coaching and emotional intelligence, I insisted recently in The Country that this type of behavior on the part of parents is “counterproductive” and limits the development and autonomy of the young person, even when it is done “with the best intentions.” José Ángel Morales, professor of Neuroscience at the Complutense University (UCM), speaks along similar lines, recalling that he has encountered students who attend check-ups accompanied by their parents. “In these cases I explain to the mother that what needs to be promoted is the student’s critical reasoning, that he is the one who refutes a correction, not his parents,” points out. Celestino Rodríguez, dean of the Faculty of Education of the University of Oviedo, recognize to The Commerce who has seen parents who don’t think it’s okay to be prevented from staying at their children’s academic meetings. Is it a widespread problem? Valdivia and Morales assure that these are cases “isolated”not the general pattern, although the truth is that they are enough to have led at least two Spanish faculties to hang posters. In reality, the phenomenon goes beyond Granada, Oviedo or the rest of Spain and connects with a reality about which experts they have been around for a while warning: the “helicopter parents”parents committed to permanently protecting their children, ensuring their choices, education… In other words, they ‘fly over’ their decisions and the overprotect. The trend also coincides with the emergence of a new fatherly profilefathers and mothers of Gen millennialstrained at universities, qualified (sometimes with managerial experience) and who feel legitimate to go to faculties to deal with professors. Images | Victoria Heath (Unsplash) and Priscilla Du Preez … Read more

is in a park full of parents with umbrellas

by

In times where love seems to be summed up in a “swipe left” or “swipe right”, finding a partner has never been so easy… Or so difficult. While Tinder, Bumble or Hinge promise algorithmic compatibility, in China the most popular dating “app” does not require an internet connection, just a printer, an umbrella and worried parents. Every weekend, entire parks in cities like Beijing, Shanghai and Chongqing are transformed into a mosaic of laminated posters with personal descriptions. It is not the singles themselves who place them, but their parents. It is the so-called marriage market or xiangqin jiao (literally, “blind dating corner”), a phenomenon that can be described as an analog version of a dating app. Love in times of demographic crisis. The rise of these markets has its origins in a paradox: while matching apps and agencies multiply, weddings and births plummet. In 2024, only 6.1 million couples will get married in China, 21% less than the previous year and the lowest number since records began. according to data from the Wall Street Journal. This year there was a small rebound — 3.54 million marriages in the first half — thanks to a new policy that simplifies civil registration according to the South Morning Post. But the general trend continues to plummet. The causes of this situation they are multiple: long working hours, high housing prices, gender inequality and, above all, new priorities among young people. “Energy is limited, so I eliminate what drains me the most. First thing? Dates,” confessed a 22-year-old studentreflecting a profound generational change. Faced with this scenario, many parents decided to move from concern to action: if their children are not looking for a partner online, they are looking for one in the parks. How does the Tinder of paper? According to Noema Magazinethe first love market emerged more than a decade ago in Shanghai, in People’s Park. Every Saturday and Sunday, no matter rain or shine, the park is filled with parents with signs hanging on ropes, benches or open umbrellas. They detail age, height, weight, salary, property, including whether the candidate’s parents have a pension. Photos, interestingly, are optional. “Those who do it best are the average ones: neither very good nor terrible,” explained a matchmaker nicknamed the Professor Guwhich charges the equivalent of $16 to display a poster for six months. In Chongqing, another of the large cities of the southwest, The Wall Street Journal described similar scenes: retired parents squeezed on paths covered with posters. Some attendees use WeChat — the ubiquitous app in China — to scan QR codes or exchange contacts. A woman included in her profile that she earns $560 a month, that she owns a house and a car, and that she is looking for a husband “without bad habits, under 29 years old and no taller than 1.73.” On the next page, a 26-year-old man asked for a wife with a university education and “who is not too plump,” a reflection of still very traditional standards. The cultural contrast is evident. In China, marriages are still considered an economic and family alliance rather than a romantic act. Therefore, the marriage market is, as detailed in Noema Magazine“a fusion between Match.com and a farmers market,” where banners replace digital profiles and parents act as human filters. Marriage market in Shanghai Is love found? Really, few achieve success. The stories of couples formed under this phenomenon They are almost non-existent. Most return every weekend out of habit, for company or simply to kill time. A father from Shanghai, interviewed by The Agehas been there for more than a year and has only gotten two matches for his 36-year-old son, with no results. “I only act as an intermediary, I pass the information on to him, but in the end it depends on him,” he confessed resignedly. Despite everything, for many it is a form of generational catharsis. “Our kids think ‘why should I settle?’” said a woman nicknamed Sister Gaoa veteran matchmaker who arrives every week with dozens of laminated profiles. “In our generation, people put up with more. Today they don’t want to tolerate anything.” There are also young people who challenge the norm. As reported by the state media CGTNHuang Junjie, 29, decided to advertise himself in the Beijing market. “I tried apps like Douyin or Xiaohongshu, but they felt very far away. Here at least you see people face to face,” he explained, standing next to his sign. He was looking for a mature woman and was even willing to get married. matrilocal —living with the wife’s family—something unthinkable a generation ago. Beyond love. Behind every umbrella is a story of anxiety and family pride. In China, many parents feel that seeing their children married is their last mission in life. In a society where being single is perceived almost as a failure, the markets They are both a space of hope and shame. For this reason, some parents They confessed to feeling humiliated for having to “offer” their children in public, although others defended their right to intervene. “The girls are not willing to say ‘I want a boyfriend’, so we help them,” said a mother from Shanghai. In essence, the phenomenon also reflects loneliness of an older generation. With more than 300 million retirees, many of them widowed or divorced, attending the love market is also a way to socialize, not to be left alone at home. Meanwhile, the Government is trying to stop the decline in marriages with economic incentives, child subsidies and even university courses on “romantic education.” But, as analysts point outthe results remain modest: young people value personal freedom more than the pressure to get married. A pressure for women. In this scenario, women bear disproportionate pressure. In China, staying single beyond the age of 27 can make you a Sheng Nuliterally “leftover woman.” The term, popularized by state media in the 2000s, became a social stigma that pushes many professionals to justify their singleness to … Read more

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.