Parshas Vayeira 5787
Updated: 39 minutes ago
Educating a Child Not to Damage. Parents are obligated to use all their parenting skills to teach their children not to do any damage [or steal] (1). Even though there is no monetary obligation to pay (as in the next paragraph), it is fitting that parents educate by getting the child to pay [without anger or force]. Also they could pay themselves in front of the child or at least pay without him and tell him that they paid (2).
Katan [Minor] Who Damaged. If a minor [boy under the age of 13, girl under the age of 12] damaged another person's property even intentionally, he is not obligated to pay, since minors are not responsible for their deeds. The parents also have no obligation to pay. This is when a child does damage once in a while. However if the child causes damage repeatedly Beis Din or Rabbonim should step in and save others from this repeated damage. This might include making the parents pay or barring the minor from entering certain areas. This is similar to a case (3) where orphans are regularly causing damage and Beis Din steps in and appoints a guardian to be in charge of the orphans to make sure that they do not damage further.
Taking Child to a Store. If a parent takes a very young child to a store and puts him down where he can easily knock over breakable things and he damaged, there is a big debate among the Poskim if the parent is obligated to pay. This might be similar to the Gemara (4) where it states that if Reuven took Shimon's animal and placed it [Ma'amid] next to the grain of another and it ate it, the placer is obligated to pay even though it's not his animal. The Minchas Yitzchok (5) held that it applies to a small child like in our case. Similarly, if a guest eating at a host's table places a child on his lap who knocks over an item or causes damage, he would have to pay. R' Moshe Shternbuch (6) says that it depends whether the obligation of a Ma'amid is because of a man [the placer] doing damage (7) or an owner-type responsibility on the animal he placed there (8). According to the first pshat the parent would have to pay and according to the second, he would not. He suggests that they should make a monetary compromise and pay a portion. One should certainly be careful not to get into this question and keep the child in the shopping cart or some similar safe place. Whether the child has to or should pay when he grows up will be discussed next time b'ezras hashem.
(1) עיין ערוך השלחן שמח:ג (2) תשובות והנהגות ד:שה (3) רמ"א חו"מ קי:ה, סמ"א שם:טו (4) ב"ק נו: (5) הובא בשו"ת וישב משה ב:י (6) תשובות והנהגות ד:שיז (7) רשב"א ב"ק נו: (8) תוספות שם