I was certainly not saying that no one should help their kids or let them
take consequences for their activities -- but, if your kid hasn't gotten
arrested or even if they have, there is not that much that the "system"
does -- I was taking issue with the idea that all the parents of kids who
are in trouble are "bad" parents or condoning what their kids do.  There are
a lot of kids on the fringes of these activities where the parents are
totally freaked out [I was one of them] and where they can't find help [it
cost me a fortune and took more hours than my 60 hour a week job].  There
isn't much out there, believe me.  And if you're a single parent trying to
make it on a crappy income, I can't imagine how you would do it.   We need,
as a society to offer more than arresting the kids after they are in BIG
trouble -- because when they are just in little trouble, not much happens -- 
and throwing them into punitive situations where they just reinforce each
other.  PROGRAMS -- job, after school, etc is what we need, not punishment.

Diane Wiley

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dennis Plante" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, June 04, 2005 10:51 AM
Subject: RE: Fw: [Mpls] Terrill's open letter...


>
>
> Diane Wiley writes:
>
> Wow, I am overwhelmed by some of the assumptions here that Dennis is
making.
>
> First, that the parents of gang kids didn't teach their kids values.  Lots
> and lots of gang kids have parents who did try to teach their kids values
> and the parents are totally freaked out and without any help to deal with
> their kids.  Let's say you have a young kid who is associated with a gang
> and selling pot to get money, which gets him deeper and deeper into the
> gang.  What do you do?  Say "honey, get an honest job to earn money"?  And
> where does that job come from?  RT just said on the radio that federal
funds
> were cut for the jobs for gang kids program.  They got 29 jobs last year
and
> hope to get 80 this year for gang kids.  That's a drop in the bucket.
> There's another city program for jobs for kids that also had cuts.  They
> have enough money for 300 jobs, says RT and they need 3000.  Wanna keep
kids
> out of gangs?  Job programs are probably the best way.  If you want to
help
> kids, lecturing them about values is great, but getting them a job is
> changing their behavior and actually DOING SOMETHING.
>
> A little statistic about jobs I read in the Nation -- there was a study
> where they had adult males, black and white, in Milwaukee go out to get
jobs
> with similar resumes.  The white males with HS diplomas and a criminal
> record got called back almost twice as much as the black males with HS
> diplomas and NO criminal record.  Black teenagers can get jobs, but a lot
of
> them are going to need help, and that also goes for Asian, Latino and
White
> teenagers, gang members or not.
>
> Second, kicking your kid out.  I got news for you.  You can't do that
> legally.  Not if they are under 16, and many of the "gang kids" are under
> 16.  And what happens if they are 16 and you DO kick them out?  How do
they
> support themselves?  More pot selling, stealing, gangbanging?  That's real
> positive.  You've lost any chance at helping them go straight and lead a
> decent life.  It's a basic tenent of all kinds of therapies, cognitive,
> behavioral, whatever, that you have to replace the bad behavior with
> something else or you haven't got a chance at real change.  This punitive
> stuff does not work at changing people.
>
> And finally, look at the impact on families where there are problem kids.
> These families are already stressed out.  I know a woman who has 4 kids,
has
> been on and off welfare and lives in section 8 housing.  Her oldest son
got
> busted for crack and she almost lost her house.  What the heck good is
that
> going to do?  She's trying to work at her job and make it so she can stay
> off welfare, and they threatened to kick her out of her house.  Hello?
Her
> oldest didn't even live there, but he gave their address because where
does
> he live anyway?  But what if he did?  Do you think she necessarily HAD to
> know that he was dealing?  I don't think so.  And if she did, what could
she
> do about it except tell him not to?  And what possible good would it do to
> destroy her and her other kids' lives?
>
> From Tangletown now because I had to leave Powderhorn for my teenagers'
sake
>
>
> Dennis Plante Responds:
> Diane, it appears you cared for your child enough that you removed them
from
> a potentially life-threatening situation.  I commend you for that.  And I
> believe, as a parent, it was your responsibility to do so.
>
> My belief?  A parents responsibility does not stop at telling a child "get
> an honest job and earn money".  If you have a child (and decide to keep
and
> raise that child), you then "own" the responibility of raising them.
>
> If support of family members does not exist in a single parent scenario
then
> that parent DOES have a responsibility to their child and society to seek
> assistance from the community & government in intervening with the problem
> they are experiencing.  I do not believe it is acceptable to allow the
child
> to continue with activity that is both illegal and detrimental to THEIR
> over-all well-being.  And YES, I do believe that having the child removed
> from the household IS necessary at times, for the good of all members in
the
> family unit.  But only after everything that could possibly be done has
been
> done.
>
> To knowingly allow a child to continue their involvement with street gangs
> plays a part in condemning that child to less of a future than they might
> have had.  Intervention at ANY COST, at ANY POINT in the scenario, will
> always result in offering a better future to that child than standing by
and
> doing nothing.
>
> I have met and had the chance to speak with many former street-gang
members
> that are now out and involved with the communities they live in.  Almost
> without exception, they have told me that they wished someone had
intervened
> (with them) when they had first gotten involved with the activity that
> landed them in trouble.
>
>
>
> dennis plante
> lind-bohanon
>
>
>


REMINDERS:
1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If 
you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL 
PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list.

2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.

For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________

Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn 
E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[email protected]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls

Reply via email to