Peter,
I can understand that you may feel that way but what prompted this review was not the
street kids but a
developmentally backward child (who had a home) who pushed a younger child into the
river and let him drown.
It was the grandmother's and family's need for revenge that saw this thing go to trial
although it never
should have.
Many people think that a streetwise kid who has the smarts and language and the
bravado is mature enough to
foresee the consequences of their actions but, in reality, those just hide immaturity
from predators.
Insurance companies know that many people up to age 25 do not foresee the consequences
of their actions and
that is why they charge higher premiums.
Rod was a youth worker for many years also and he doesn't see it as you do. I'm not
saying you are wrong but
that he has a different view after similar experiences.
Jailing children that young is an admittance on our part that we can't be bothered to
help, that it's too
hard and we'd rather shut them away than deal with the evils that created them. To me
this is a cop out.
Children can be aware that what they do is unacceptable or that it is considered
wrong. They may even know
that something is criminal according to the law but they have no real understanding of
it like an adult does
or be able to foresee the longterm consequences of what they do. Brutalised children
don't care, you are
right. And why should they? What do we teach them? We teach them that it's alright for
us to brutalise them
and we don't need to care about them, but if they do something we call a crime they go
to jail.
I really don't think that going back to the primitive past in dealing with problem
children will do us as a
society any good. We will pay for it in the long run - in fact, we already are. By
treating children of 12
as adult criminals we just admit that we are not up to the job and are admitting our
defeat. I think we
should do better.
In many north European countries people would not dream of jailing children and yet
they don't have the same
problems as we do. They treat the whole thing very differently and with good results.
Why do we continue to
do what hasn't worked in the past, is still not working but we'll do it more so? How
do we create better
people by taking away their human rights?
Trudy
Peter McGrath wrote:
> At 10:37 AM 1/14/00 +1100, you wrote:
> Dear Trudy and Guys
> Apologies for any isult given, BUT. Having spent 7 years working with
> young people who are living rough i do not agree with you on this one
> trudy. While I find it slightly abhorent that we consider jailing people
> this young many street kids i have met certainly are aware of the fact that
> their actions constitute criminal behaviour, by the mores of our society.
> I personally am much more concerned about the social ills that brutalize
> young people until they get to the stage where violating someones integrity
> appears to be acceptable behaviour. While thes young people commit criminal
> behaviour and are aware that it is criminal (by law) they do not see it as
> being (WRONG) as they are treated in the same way. The only difference is
> that our brutality is institutional and their brutality is personal
>
> >Dear Recoznetters,
> >
> >I suggest we start the new year off with some fundamental activism -
> >letter writing!
> >The Carr govt is proposing to review the age at which children are
> >deemed to understand that their 'criminal' conduct is wrong. The Carr
> >govt is proposing to lower the age from 14 to 12.
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> RecOzNet2 has a page @ http://www.green.net.au/recoznet2 and is archived at
>http://www.mail-archive.com/
> To unsubscribe from this list, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], and in the body
> of the message, include the words: unsubscribe announce or click here
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=unsubscribe%20announce
> This posting is provided to the individual members of this group without permission
>from the
> copyright owner for purposes of criticism, comment, scholarship and research under
>the "fair
> use" provisions of the Federal copyright laws and it may not be distributed further
>without
> permission of the copyright owner, except for "fair use."
>
> RecOzNet2 is archived for members @
>http://www.mail-archive.com/recoznet2%40paradigm4.com.au/
--
***************************************************
"A conservative intellectual movement doesn't exist, since
conservatism is what's left over after you have stopped thinking."
-- Sean Turnbull
***************************************************
-------------------------------------------------------
RecOzNet2 has a page @ http://www.green.net.au/recoznet2 and is archived at
http://www.mail-archive.com/
To unsubscribe from this list, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], and in the body
of the message, include the words: unsubscribe announce or click here
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=unsubscribe%20announce
This posting is provided to the individual members of this group without permission
from the
copyright owner for purposes of criticism, comment, scholarship and research under
the "fair
use" provisions of the Federal copyright laws and it may not be distributed further
without
permission of the copyright owner, except for "fair use."
RecOzNet2 is archived for members @
http://www.mail-archive.com/recoznet2%40paradigm4.com.au/
