Who do you blame when your kid is a brat?
Pampered and spoiled like a Siamese cat
Blaming the kids is a lie and a shame
You know exactly who’s to blame
The mother and the father
3 Likes
Also of note, something like that happened here. Kid who had already been dinged for reckless driving plowed into a mom jogging with her two kids in a stroller. Mom died. Kid was tested positive for THC. Admitted to smoking 3-4 times a day. People who knew the kid’s mom said that she would smoke with him. He did do jail time, and he did NOT get off early for good behavior. Unfortunately, reading the coverage of his parole hearing did not make me think that jail taught him any life lessons (such as accountability for his actions).
1 Like
I agree completely. That is my point, he has wronged another and deserves to be punished for it. He is unusually unaware of consequences because he has been raised to be unaware, that doesn’t mean he should get away with anything (and he hasn’t). But we can’t deny that it is uncommon for rich people to be raised as ‘spoiled brats’ and to have no significant concept of consequences. That doesn’t mean we sentence less harshly, just as I don’t think we should if they have a history of abuse. Where it matters is in treatment to prevent further actions. He probably needs some kind of therapy as anyone who goes to court with their psychology being a factor.
Based on what? If a child never gets burned you can’t expect the adult to react sensibly around fire. All I can read from your comment is contradiction. You admit that it is plausible and deny it in the same paragraph. Rich children believing they can get away with everything is such a generic persona that it is in almost every rich kid character on tv. Affluenza clearly exists. But because it is the product of a rich upbringing you refuse to acknowledge something you then list as ‘parental neglect’. I never said they should be treated differently from those who are raised to be arseholes. In fact I don’t care what your reasoning is, if you are fucked up because of your past you should still face the same penalty. However if they genuinely have no significant concept of consequences then they also need help with that, just as those raised in violence should receive help.
It’s still a ridiculous name. Not instilling ethics and boundaries can occur in any socioeconomic group. Sometimes it happens because the parents are too busy working, spending time in jail, fighting an uphill battle over the environment and peer group. Other times, it’s because the parents think the child is so special, they see no reasons for consequences ever, they have someone else raising their children, or they throw money at their children and not love and guidance. That still falls under the category of neglect and/or abuse.
For whatever reason, you seem to be in love with the terminology and so this is my last comment on it. It’s so trifling and not worth the amount of time I’ve spent on it already.
1 Like
Even the Oompa Loompas know who’s to blame for Affluenza.
This is the first time youve clarified that it is not in any way ridiculous you just have some absurd dislike for someone creating a term for something specific as opposed to generalising to abuse/neglect. It is a ridiculous position. As is your manner of discourse. Just because you dislike something does not excuse arguing in childish form.
Treat it like an actual mental disorder if you’re going to use it as a defense.
Edit: Not ot mention potentially treat it as a form of parental abuse and lump it in with beatings, neglect, and other forms of offences that would have a parent’s child taken from them by social services.
/thread
2 Likes
I went to look for this link thinking the kid was still in prison, and was going to remark re-the comparison of sentence, and found out some good news : ) as a result:
“But daddy I want a golden goose NOW!”
1 Like
I am not sure if it was part of commentary or decision but there was discussion of the horrible nature of the Texan Juvenile penitentiary system and that would do nothing but inflict more harm. I do wonder if some more innovative lawyer defending a poor defendant and claiming this as evidence that the state system is cruel and not fit for their client and that Texas should pay to send them to private care in California instead.
1 Like
This all sounded very familiar. And sure enough, it was eerily similar to this case from a few years ago, about the awfully spoiled kids of rich chinese: http://edition.cnn.com/2011/09/16/world/asia/china-elite-children/
2 Likes
Sounds like a good argument for the abolishment of inheritance.
3 Likes
“Texan Juvenile penitentiary system”
There is no such thing as a Texas juvenile penitentiary system. Texas juvenile courts are civil, not criminal, courts. If he had gotten then the “20 years”, then he would have been civilly confined until he was 18; at that point, another court would have decided based on his behavior and contrition whether to continue in prison or be paroled. There is one unfortunate downside to Texas juvenile commitment: There are no alcohol or drug treatment programs paid for by the state.
The current Texas juvenile system, by the way, is considered one of the better ones in the country. There was a set of 2007 reforms following a sex abuse scandal in the system, that has gotten praise from around the country (and subsequent reforms in 2009 and 2011). The current system focuses much more rehabilitation, and the number of committed children is a third of what it was in the early 2000s. Juvenile crime has dropped sharply since the reforms too. Whaddaya know, right? Shoveling kids into prisons might not have been the best approach.
Juvenile commitment is pretty rare in Texas these days, outside of crimes of violence. And even for adults, except for repeat offenders, probation + treatment is a likely outcome for DUI manslaughter cases.
Interesting. No idea where I read what I did but given your statements I suspect it either conflated changes over time with the judges opinion or suffered from editing that lost some content.
I would note that given how incredibly wealthy his parents are, $450,000 a year is pocket change. They’ll barely feel it.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
