a childs awareness as a measure of intellegence or upbringing is very flawed, so that pointless argument apart, the wrong of this type of selling as i see it follows -:
example 1
you have an amount of cash kept out of normal site say in a bedroom drawer, you child requires some money and you trust your child to go and get lets say £5, not take more than allowed or help thememselves later without asking.
the principle is trust for THIS IS A ONCE ONLY TRANSACTION WITH YOUR PERMISSION.
i.e. You would not expect that child as a person you fully trust to hence forth help themselves as they please, without asking you 1st.
Examle 2.
you have some money held your vehicle, you freind sells you a small item which you fund from your 'pot'. You would not expect them to supply more items on the assumption you have bought before.
Credit Card companies hold very sensative information, completing a transaction can be for very large amounts, the initial transaction may be for £0.99 but the trader can then draw many hundreds of pounds before you are aware.
But just ring up and ask any simple question and your subgected to a barrage of mindless data protection act privacy questions. Yet making a single credit card transaction to any trader, allows that trader to later draw more money unhindered from your card and as they see fit. Had someone taken money without prior permission, be prosecuted and offerred the excuse 'it was for the victim to buy a bowl of green cornflakes' as a defence, well i ask you?
it is this afrontary to your trust you have should expected from or any trusted relation or freind is what causes the angst, and also in complete innocence you don't expect anyone would dare help them selelves having been so trusted, face on and doscovered uyou'd likely punch their lights out.
In the UK law has was changed to some degree to reduce this problem, in that if you tell your credit card company to make no more payments to that vendor then the card company has to stop those payments - but you must tell them and only from that time are you protected.
Trouble is, partly due to Apples slow advising of transactions, you are often well down before you realise. While i do see the point that many do not want 'nannying', given the target market is the young, used blatently as a ruse to gaining payment from the 'responsible so financing adult', i think it should be illigal to draw additional payments from any card without further password.
i personally dislike it when insurrance companies put me as a default on auto-renew, they claim it prevents me going accidentally un-insurred, but it is well known it's best to shop arround. I saved £180 on a motor bike policy offering far better cover as example,
I make it very clear i do not want auto renue every time i buy any service on any card.
For those who do not care for that restriction thats fine, a direct debit access should be allowed, for this would be i think as close at it could be, to appease all.
Alan