NYC Student, 12, Arrested for Doodling on Desk

[AreaCode707]

I know one thing is for sure-the rest of the kids in that classroom got "scared straight" when the police led that girl out in handcuffs-at least for a while.

I think at 10 I might have preferred the handcuffs to having to clean the boys' bathroom for four weeks.

 

[Moonbeam]

"The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for
authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place
of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their
households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They
contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties
at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers.

Attributed to SOCRATES by Plato



Societies with loose and relative morality, selfishness, disrespect for elders, lacking manners and etiquette turn to absolutism in order to save them from themselves but by then it is too late and the children usually end up suffering the most.

I guess so. Did you read the other thread about what is happening in Greece?

 

[HumblePie]

It's not a question of determining right or wrong, because most kids at that age are able to do so, it's a question of impulse control. Kids around that age (taking into account differing levels of maturity) will often do petty things wrong that get them into trouble. When asked if they knew it was wrong, they say yes. When asked if they knew they'd be caught, they say yes. When asked, "then why did you do it?" they can't give an answer. Their brains are still connecting those pieces. Do you know anything about child development whatsoever?

And since you decided to malign my mental acuity, I scored in the 90th percentile or higher of every standardized test I ever took, graduated high school at 15, graduated college at 19 and started working corporate at a Fortune 500 company the same year. The discussion in question isn't about intellect or a knowledge of right or wrong, it's about the ability for children of a certain age to make decisions based on their predictive knowledge of the future.

Link to prove I'm not making shit up

You state that a child of 12 lacks the mental capacity to evaluate the consequences of their actions. I said that is bull from both knowing my childhood, and that of helping raise kids.

Kids are typically well aware of their actions even at a young age. They may be impulsive and act when they should think a little longer, but that is something not exclusive to children. Heck, read these forums a bit more and you'll see my argument there.

But let us evaluate your example shall we? A child does an action they know is wrong. When asked if they knew it was wrong, most children will know it is wrong unless it was an action in an experience they have never had or can not relate to a previous experience. That is the mental capacity we all start developing at a very early age. My nephew of two knows not to run his toy Thomas the train on the back of the couch. He does it anyhow, but I'll explain a bit more why about that in a second. He does an action he knows full well is against the rules and is wrong. When asked if he knows that is wrong he states he does. When asked if he knows the consequences of taking that action, he states he knows it. When asked why he did it, he may do what many children do, shrug his shoulders and "cop out." Actually, most kids do the cop out part from question one if they think that will get what they want, which is attention, without the consequences.

Just because my nephew is too young to have the mental capacity to EXPRESS his motivations, does not mean he lacks them. This is where I have cause with your argument. Once taught that expressions and he proper results and consequences, people of all ages behave better.

So in my example, relating to yours, about my nephew and his actions you might be wondering why would my nephew put his toy on the back of the couch. This is easy, and comes in two parts. One, he wants attention at the time. He does this out of impulse to get attention, because he knows if he is caught, and he will be, I or another adult figure will catch him. He has rationalized what he believes the consequences of his actions to be worth the risk of drawing that attention. This is because he, even at two years old, he feels a scolding is worth the risk at this point for attention because a scolding is all he has received for such actions thus far. The second part is because children are always testing the boundaries of their environment, which includes rules imposed on their behavior. They know something is wrong, they know the consequences, they may even rationalize enough to accept the consequences prior to action (in which case it something not done on impulse which they also do), and still act. This is more instinct here than mental function. The instinct is to check that the boundary as they believe it to be still exists. It is a natural ANIMAL instinct and can be viewed in every species on the planet. To explore, to test, and constantly verify ones surroundings.

As a parent or an authority figure, one must recognize all aspects of why an action was committed. Children are rarely as naive as many people make them out to be. So going back to the example with my nephew, what would be my proper course of action(s) to deal with the situation? After realizing what his actions were about here is what I did to correct the behavior.

1) impose a harsher punishment and explain to him that the more he continues this action, the harsher the punishment will be. Explain in detail what further punishment may be. This causes my nephew to re-evaluate the risk versus reward scenario. Doing this on my part MAY be enough to correct the behavior, but it may not. So the next part is...

2) To explain the proper course of action I want him to take an alternatives so he can get what he wants, in this case attention, without any consequences. Now that my nephew understands he has a proper channel that has no risk and all reward while further actions I do not want him doing will impose higher risks/punishments the behavior gets corrected.

Sorry for the long winded diatribe, but the main point of my post is I KNOW through personal experience and psych studies that kids have a much greater mental capacity than adults give them credit for. Actually, I remember reading somewhere (wish I remember so I could provide the link) that kids actually have a much larger mental capacity than adults. The problem is they lack the experience(s) to which to use that capacity. Hence why they need proper teaching.

Again, I point out that kids are not impaired by their age that prevents them from making "predictive decisions of the future" at all. They are fully capable of doing so. Kids, just like adults, make decisions for the future based on experiences of the past. Just like adults, if they don't have enough experiences or have received improper ones, they will make bad decisions. That has nothing to do with age what so ever.

 

[James Bond]

.
Arresting a 12 year old girl (even if she does look like a little harlot) for writing on a desk in a manner which can be erased is just plain stupid. Period.

Had to Google that one.. thanks for teaching me a new word internet!!

 

[AreaCode707]

You state that a child of 12 lacks the mental capacity to evaluate the consequences of their actions.

That is NOT what I said. That is the exact OPPOSITE of what I said.

I said kids have the capacity to evaluate the consequences of their actions and tell right from wrong, but that kids of that age do not always have the impulse control to change their actions based on their knowledge. Some do, some don't, depending on the speed of their maturity.

So the rest of your post is arguing with something I haven't said and is basically irrelevant.

I said that is bull from both knowing my childhood, and that of helping raise kids.

Because all kids are exactly the same. Glad we got that out of the way.

Kids are typically well aware of their actions even at a young age.

Depends on the child's own development and how well they've been taught.

They may be impulsive and act when they should think a little longer, but that is something not exclusive to children. Heck, read these forums a bit more and you'll see my argument there.

True but does not move your argument forward. Point being?

But let us evaluate your example shall we? A child does an action they know is wrong. When asked if they knew it was wrong, most children will know it is wrong unless it was an action in an experience they have never had or can not relate to a previous experience. That is the mental capacity we all start developing at a very early age. My nephew of two knows not to run his toy Thomas the train on the back of the couch. He does it anyhow, but I'll explain a bit more why about that in a second. He does an action he knows full well is against the rules and is wrong. When asked if he knows that is wrong he states he does. When asked if he knows the consequences of taking that action, he states he knows it. When asked why he did it, he may do what many children do, shrug his shoulders and "cop out." Actually, most kids do the cop out part from question one if they think that will get what they want, which is attention, without the consequences.

Again, you're not forwarding your argument here. You restated what I said, and then drew a separate conclusion. I posit that children shrug because they sometimes honestly don't know why they did something in the face of certain punishment. You posit that they do it solely from the desire for attention anticipating that they won't get punishment. You haven't provided any supporting evidence for your conclusion; I posted a comprehensive child development study on this exact issue in support of mine.

Just because my nephew is too young to have the mental capacity to EXPRESS his motivations, does not mean he lacks them. This is where I have cause with your argument. Once taught that expressions and he proper results and consequences, people of all ages behave better.

So your child raising ability comes from a nephew? I helped raise my twin sisters. Not that it's especially relevant, but you cited yourself as an expert due to experience so I am balancing that.

I never argued that kids don't have motivations to do what they do. I instead argue that they have not matured yet to the point where they can properly balance their short-term motivations with their knowledge of long-term consequences and act upon that balance.

So in my example, relating to yours, about my nephew and his actions you might be wondering why would my nephew put his toy on the back of the couch. This is easy, and comes in two parts. One, he wants attention at the time. He does this out of impulse to get attention, because he knows if he is caught, and he will be, I or another adult figure will catch him. He has rationalized what he believes the consequences of his actions to be worth the risk of drawing that attention.

That may be true sometimes but 2 year olds do not make every decision with that level of analysis. Often times they do what they want to do because it occurs to them at that moment and they don't process long term consequences right away. The older they get, the more children can process future expectations of consequence. At a certain point that future expectation begins to affect their immediate behavior. These are STAGES that kids go through as they grow and learn.

This is because he, even at two years old, he feels a scolding is worth the risk at this point for attention because a scolding is all he has received for such actions thus far. The second part is because children are always testing the boundaries of their environment, which includes rules imposed on their behavior. They know something is wrong, they know the consequences, they may even rationalize enough to accept the consequences prior to action (in which case it something not done on impulse which they also do), and still act. This is more instinct here than mental function. The instinct is to check that the boundary as they believe it to be still exists. It is a natural ANIMAL instinct and can be viewed in every species on the planet. To explore, to test, and constantly verify ones surroundings.

Not sure how you're tying this into your argument. Initially you said kids are well aware of their actions, motivations and consequences and therefore can control all their behavior. Now you're saying that kids are just acting on instinct, therefore not necessarily in control of your behavior. Which argument are you making?

As a parent or an authority figure, one must recognize all aspects of why an action was committed. Children are rarely as naive as many people make them out to be. So going back to the example with my nephew, what would be my proper course of action(s) to deal with the situation? After realizing what his actions were about here is what I did to correct the behavior.

1) impose a harsher punishment and explain to him that the more he continues this action, the harsher the punishment will be. Explain in detail what further punishment may be. This causes my nephew to re-evaluate the risk versus reward scenario.

Hopefully you're taking into account kids' ability to understand different levels of punishment at different ages. A two year old usually needs to be disciplined during or very soon after a disobedient act or they won't form a strong association between their action and the discipline. An teenager can go for months between action and discipline and still associate it correctly.

Doing this on my part MAY be enough to correct the behavior, but it may not. So the next part is...

2) To explain the proper course of action I want him to take an alternatives so he can get what he wants, in this case attention, without any consequences. Now that my nephew understands he has a proper channel that has no risk and all reward while further actions I do not want him doing will impose higher risks/punishments the behavior gets corrected.

Again, hopefully you're doing this explaining on a two-year-old's level.


Sorry for the long winded diatribe, but the main point of my post is I KNOW through personal experience and psych studies that kids have a much greater mental capacity than adults give them credit for. Actually, I remember reading somewhere (wish I remember so I could provide the link) that kids actually have a much larger mental capacity than adults. The problem is they lack the experience(s) to which to use that capacity. Hence why they need proper teaching.[/QUOTE]

You're back to arguing with a non-existing point I made that kids have limited mental capacity. My argument is NOT that they are limited in their thought process, but that their DECISION MAKING ABILITY is not fully formed as it would be in an adult.

 

[woolfe9999]

Had to Google that one.. thanks for teaching me a new word internet!!

I knew what he meant. I am, however, a bit puzzled as to why he thinks she is a harlot.

- wolf

 

[dmcowen674]

While I tend to agree that discipline has gone way down hill and students are much more unruly than they should be, common sense MUST enter the equation.

Arresting a 12 year old girl (even if she does look like a little harlot) for writing on a desk in a manner which can be erased is just plain stupid. Period.

Likewise, nearly expelling a SEVEN YEAR OLD KID for playing with a Lego gun also lacks common sense.

Discipline is fine, and both kids should be disciplined for breaking school rules, but knee-jerk bullshit reactions like this only waste money. They don't teach the kid that bringing toy guns to school isn't bad, and they don't teach the little harlot that writing should best be done on paper. All they do is serve to sour both kids and parents against the establishment.

Crush Kill Destroy Crush Kill Destroy Crush Kill Destroy

Danger Will Robinson Danger

 

[lord_emperor]

1. Pedobear likes.

2. WTF? When I wrote on my desk I had to stay in over lunch hour and scrub or sand it off.

 

[Noobtastic]

 

[StageLeft]

I know one thing is for sure-the rest of the kids in that classroom got "scared straight" when the police led that girl out in handcuffs-at least for a while.

I'm sure they did. Everything has a silver lining but the overall cost is what's important. I bet kids are less likely to talk back to teachers in Saudi than in the US, but is it overall a model to aspire to?

 

[spittledip]

Haha, all I'm saying is we've been pussified as a nation. Why do students talk back to teachers? Because if teachers give the students a beating, parents will complain and teachers will get fired. Now these days, students have all the power and teachers are at their mercy. And people are wondering why the US has such a horrible education system...

Good point. I don't think that justifies such a harsh punishment though. Obviously I don't really think you believe that either.

 

[bobsmith1492]

Whatever is wrong with a brusque "Kelly! Clean that off right now!"

 

[SandEagle]

handcuffing a 12 yr old for doodling on a desk? what is this world coming to? i feel for the young generation...they have a long, hard road ahead of them...

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local...fed_for_doodling_on_a_desk.html#ixzz0efLeOWQT

 

[CPA]

You idiot, every child is born loving learning. Schools destroy that love because they don't know how to teach. It isn't about being promiscuous or strict in education, it is about consciousness. You can't keep knowledge from those who want it.

But what am I saying, you are ignorant because you went to school. You died mentally a long time ago. What was I thinking, prodding you in your sleep.

I assume you did not go to school, Enlightened One.

 

[Atreus21]

You can't keep knowledge from those who want it.

This is a severe nit pick, but oh yes you freaking can.

 

[Taejin]

I would hit it

 

[sciwizam]

I would hit it

Why don't you have a seat over there?

 

[Double Trouble]

Hi, I'm Chris Hansen.... why don't you have a seat over there?

This is another example of how people just fail to use common sense. There are probably 50 better ways to handle the situation that would have resulted in an overall better outcome while costing society less. Instead, they threw common sense out the window and went with draconian stupidity FTL.